From Vincent-Can you call Star Wars a 70MM masterpiece when it was not filmed as such? I think if I remember correctly in the late 70’s and 80’s there were many big films released as 70MM blow ups but they never look nearly as good as the real thing.
I think it’s safe to to say that as a 70mm presentation, “Star Wars” was superior to anything else in the market at the time. You got a bright and sharp picture image on the screen, not to mention the fantastic Six Track Dolby Stereo soundtrack. The also prompted many, many theaters to upgrade their projection and sound equipment over time. Sure, when you compare a blow-up to a true 65mm image, the 65mm image is clearly superior. But compared to what we get now, I’ll take a 70mm blow-up anytime.
I’ll agree with Rhett on “Far And Away.” Mikael Soloman’s cinematography is superb, but by shooting the film in foggy and dark locations, the film left most people asking, “What’s so special about 70mm?” But if you recall, when the Oklahoma scenes came up, the picture was awesome.
Bill H: Cherish those memories, because Star Wars: Episode III is on its way! :) I remember those feelings of excitement watching that original film. What a kick it was. Now I’m getting depressed! Another great theater is about to be closed. We don’t have 70mm presentation hardly anymore (except for revivals and IMAX DMR). And George is unleashing the last of a pretty underwhelming trilogy. Who said change was good?
Moviegoers in Los Angeles have been fortunate in the last 5 years. The Egyptian Theatre, run by the American Cinematheque in Hollywood, has had an almost annual 70mm festival. The El Capitan recently ran “TRON” in 70mm, and the Cinerama Dome ran IAMMMMW last year.
Moviegoers in Los Angeles have been fortunate in the last 5 years. The Egyptian Theatre, run by the American Cinematheque in Hollywood, has had an almost annual 70mm festival. The El Capitan recently ran “TRON” in 70mm, and the Cinerama Dome ran IAMMMMW last year.
RE: As Columbia rolled out the restoration of “Lawrence of Arabia” in 1989 at the Century Plaza Theatre in 70MM. About 2 miles east the original Premiere site in Beverly Hills, The Warner Beverly Hills was being torn down.
I wished I would’ve known that at the time and I would’ve tried taking photos. Now is this theatre similar in design to the Warner in San Pedro?
Rhett: Movies and movie exhibition have always been a business, but I think the real showman knew that quality and business could go hand-in-hand. Give audiences a good show, great presentation and reasonable priced concessions, they’ll come and fill seats. Ted Mann, William Forman (to an extent), and Mr. Plitt of Plitt Theaters knew how to put on a show, even during the “cynical” ‘70s and '80s in their best theaters. Much of that is missing because of business types who think showmanship is old school and should be kept in the past.
In regards to “Around The World In 80 Days,” I listened to Dick May of Warner Bros. at a recent Academy (Oscars) symposium. He says (I’m paraphrasing) that striking a print for a few loyal fans isn’t cost effective. I understand where he’s coming from, but I believe the film, when seen in its proper presentation, would be a success. I’m not a big fan of “It’s A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World,” but it packed houses in Hollywood during its showings. I was glad to have seen it in 70mm. “Around The World In 80 Days,” in my opinion, isn’t much better, but it would be a draw. Show it at the Ziegfeld, Uptown in DC, the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood and the Seattle Cinerama. Costs recouped, fans happy.
The Astor Plaza, if it does close and nothing is done to save it, should run a swan song of classic films that played there. The Original “Star Wars” Trilogy. “Raiders Of The Lost Ark.” Even “Logan’s Run.” The place would be packed.
Rhett: Thanks for your additional help on the North NJ 70mm engagements. From my research, NJ certainly has had a lot of 70mm engagements.
William: I can relate to the memories of the Century Plaza theaters in Century City. I know some might feel that modern theaters like the Astor Plaza and Century Plaza aren’t as nice as the palaces of the golden age of cinema, but for my era of growing up in the 1970s and early 1980s, theaters like the Plazas were very nice. Plain but the presentation was excellent and far better than most of the multiplex theaters that were built in the 1970s. I can remember the horrendous UA and AMC 6-screeners around my area in Southern California. Shoebox auditoriums, poor sound and dreadful presentation. Kind of reminds me of many of the current megaplexes. :)
The first time I went to the Century Plaza was for the restoration of “Lawrence Of Arabia” in 1989. Excellent presentation. My only gripe was that when the massive curtains opened, a rather small screen was revealed. The Showcase on Melrose was similar to this. Big front wall, small screen.
The Century Plaza was a fine theater, much like what the Astor must have been. I never would’ve known that the main auditorium at the Century Plaza was divided. It’s one of the rare times when a large auditorium has been split and the result wasn’t too horrendous. But then again, I never saw the original auditorium, which I heard was awesome.
The Astor Plaza is just another reminder of the madness of real estate development and megaplex madness. Why can’t MTV pick another spot on which to build on? Why must our great theaters be altered or demolished? Single screen theaters can be used as “loss leaders” if I’m using the correct term. Use these flagships for audiences to attend “event” films. Bring back select 70mm presentations. The cost of a 70mm print rental will be offset by large, full houses. It worked back then, it can work now.
Audiences used to remember seeing big films like the original “Star Wars” films at the Astor Plaza, or the Century Plaza, or the UA Rivoli because both the film and presentation was far and above what they would see at a neighborhood theater. I talk to people today who rave about seeing a film like “Star Wars” or “Lawrence Of Arabia” at the big theaters of my area. That’s pretty impressive, in my opinion. The theater made an impact on how they experienced the film. What a concept! Now how many people today boast about seeing films in these new 20-30 screen megaplexes? I hear more people rave about their high quality home theater system than how they experienced “Troy” on a small screen at their $10.00 a seat megaplex.
Rhett: Thanks for the info on the Cinema 46, even though this thread is about the Astor. :)
RE: It was 1975 and yes, they didn’t really advertise the audio so you can imagine the surprise to a 14 year old when these films blasted off the screen. (Tommy and Hindenburg).
I bet it was incredible! I remember jumping out of my seat during the 70mm presentation of “Star Wars,” from the blast of the Star Wars theme, to Luke getting attacked on the bluff by a Tuskin Raider. Quite extraordinary.
RE: research for 70MM in NJ….Cinema 46 did play 1941, in 70MM 6 track. other 70MM at the Cinema 46…in the early 80’s…Superman II, Outland, Poltergeist…I saw them all there…
Thanks for the info on these. I’m only up to 1978 on my research.
RE: If you ever get to Montclair State University, they have a good microfilm set.
I have a friend who lives in Cedar Grove, so maybe after I visit her, I can visit the Monclair State University library. Last year, I went to the movies with her and she took me to the old Cinema 23. Cool theater, except for it being chopped into more auditoriums.
I’m bummed that I didn’t go to the Astor Plaza to see “Gangs of New York” last year during my visit to Manhattan. Another fine movie theater soon to be destroyed.
“Re: Tommy and the Hindenburg. I can’t say they were 70MM (I didn’t either) I was commenting on the sound.”
My response isn’t meant to be sarcastic, but a movie playing in “6-Track” in the mid-‘70s would imply it being from a 70mm print.
“I don’t recall 70MM presentations from the Cinema 46, but in 1975 those 2 films (Tommy being the first) introduced me to a whole new level of moviegoing…being a stereophinic track.They had 4 track stereo presentations or possibly 6 track.”
“Tommy” was more than likely presented in Quintaphonic Sound a 4-channel stereo mix. A buddy of mine recalls seeing it at the old Orange (CA) Cinedome and being blown away by the soundtrack.
“The Hindenburg” is one of those mystery titles in regards to its soundtrack. I don’t remember seeing any indications of “4-track” stereo presentations in the papers of the day…at least not yet. I spoke to director Robert Wise a few years ago, and he said there were no 70mm prints made of the film. That of course doesn’t mean that possibly 35mm mag stereo prints were made.
“In my research there’s really no advertising of the audio.”
The 1970s was a strange time for presentation notations in the newspapers, as you’ve seen. Every once in a while, you could see an indication of what a film was being played in, i.e. “4-track” or _“4-channel” 35mm presentations. Most of the time, presentation was left to 70mm or Universal’s Sensurround (for a short time).
The first 70mm presentation that I can remember was “Star Wars” at the Orange Plitt City Center Theater. I saw “Gone With The Wind” in the mid-‘70s when there were a number of 70mm re-releases of that film, but I don’t recall when I exactly saw it or which theater. I was pretty young at the time.
Original Post: “There was a theater by me in NJ called the Cinema 46 and in 1975 they played Tommy and The Hindenburg in 6 track. I still never heard anything like it since.”
posted by rhett on Apr 29, 2004 at 7:26am
Response: Recently, I’ve been doing microfilm research on the New York City/New Jersey areas. My focus has been on 70mm presentation, mainly in Manhattan.
It seems that the Cinema 46 was a premiere house for certain major films, with the Bellevue being the other one. There were 70mm runs of “The Sound Of Music” and “Logan’s Run” at the Bellevue, for instance. However, I’ve found no record of “Tommy” or “The Hindenburg” having played in 70mm in 1975—especially “The Hindenburg.” “Tommy” was re-released in 70mm in 1977.
During my research with Michael Coate, we haven’t found proof that “The Hindenburg” played in 70mm. Do you have access to an ad in the New Jersey newspapers of 1975 that might show what format these two films played in? Thanks.
I live fairly close to this theater and I actually went inside after church services concluded. The theater from the lobby to the auditorium seems intact. The University has kept it in very good condition, which I think is more impressive than how some modern theater chains keep their own properties.
The auditorium is big, but I’m not sure how many people it seats. There are two aisles on the outside of the seating area. Where the screen was, a stage has been set up for sermons and live band performances.
The box office still has the original ticketing machine mechanisms intact. I did not get an opportunity to visit the projection booth, but I’m surprised they still have the 35/70mm projectors there.
Can you please email me @ ? When my old computer crashed, I lost your address. Many thanks. Bill K.
From Vincent-Can you call Star Wars a 70MM masterpiece when it was not filmed as such? I think if I remember correctly in the late 70’s and 80’s there were many big films released as 70MM blow ups but they never look nearly as good as the real thing.
I think it’s safe to to say that as a 70mm presentation, “Star Wars” was superior to anything else in the market at the time. You got a bright and sharp picture image on the screen, not to mention the fantastic Six Track Dolby Stereo soundtrack. The also prompted many, many theaters to upgrade their projection and sound equipment over time. Sure, when you compare a blow-up to a true 65mm image, the 65mm image is clearly superior. But compared to what we get now, I’ll take a 70mm blow-up anytime.
I’ll agree with Rhett on “Far And Away.” Mikael Soloman’s cinematography is superb, but by shooting the film in foggy and dark locations, the film left most people asking, “What’s so special about 70mm?” But if you recall, when the Oklahoma scenes came up, the picture was awesome.
Bill H: Cherish those memories, because Star Wars: Episode III is on its way! :) I remember those feelings of excitement watching that original film. What a kick it was. Now I’m getting depressed! Another great theater is about to be closed. We don’t have 70mm presentation hardly anymore (except for revivals and IMAX DMR). And George is unleashing the last of a pretty underwhelming trilogy. Who said change was good?
Moviegoers in Los Angeles have been fortunate in the last 5 years. The Egyptian Theatre, run by the American Cinematheque in Hollywood, has had an almost annual 70mm festival. The El Capitan recently ran “TRON” in 70mm, and the Cinerama Dome ran IAMMMMW last year.
Moviegoers in Los Angeles have been fortunate in the last 5 years. The Egyptian Theatre, run by the American Cinematheque in Hollywood, has had an almost annual 70mm festival. The El Capitan recently ran “TRON” in 70mm, and the Cinerama Dome ran IAMMMMW last year.
RE: As Columbia rolled out the restoration of “Lawrence of Arabia” in 1989 at the Century Plaza Theatre in 70MM. About 2 miles east the original Premiere site in Beverly Hills, The Warner Beverly Hills was being torn down.
I wished I would’ve known that at the time and I would’ve tried taking photos. Now is this theatre similar in design to the Warner in San Pedro?
Rhett: Movies and movie exhibition have always been a business, but I think the real showman knew that quality and business could go hand-in-hand. Give audiences a good show, great presentation and reasonable priced concessions, they’ll come and fill seats. Ted Mann, William Forman (to an extent), and Mr. Plitt of Plitt Theaters knew how to put on a show, even during the “cynical” ‘70s and '80s in their best theaters. Much of that is missing because of business types who think showmanship is old school and should be kept in the past.
In regards to “Around The World In 80 Days,” I listened to Dick May of Warner Bros. at a recent Academy (Oscars) symposium. He says (I’m paraphrasing) that striking a print for a few loyal fans isn’t cost effective. I understand where he’s coming from, but I believe the film, when seen in its proper presentation, would be a success. I’m not a big fan of “It’s A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World,” but it packed houses in Hollywood during its showings. I was glad to have seen it in 70mm. “Around The World In 80 Days,” in my opinion, isn’t much better, but it would be a draw. Show it at the Ziegfeld, Uptown in DC, the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood and the Seattle Cinerama. Costs recouped, fans happy.
The Astor Plaza, if it does close and nothing is done to save it, should run a swan song of classic films that played there. The Original “Star Wars” Trilogy. “Raiders Of The Lost Ark.” Even “Logan’s Run.” The place would be packed.
Rhett: Thanks for your additional help on the North NJ 70mm engagements. From my research, NJ certainly has had a lot of 70mm engagements.
William: I can relate to the memories of the Century Plaza theaters in Century City. I know some might feel that modern theaters like the Astor Plaza and Century Plaza aren’t as nice as the palaces of the golden age of cinema, but for my era of growing up in the 1970s and early 1980s, theaters like the Plazas were very nice. Plain but the presentation was excellent and far better than most of the multiplex theaters that were built in the 1970s. I can remember the horrendous UA and AMC 6-screeners around my area in Southern California. Shoebox auditoriums, poor sound and dreadful presentation. Kind of reminds me of many of the current megaplexes. :)
The first time I went to the Century Plaza was for the restoration of “Lawrence Of Arabia” in 1989. Excellent presentation. My only gripe was that when the massive curtains opened, a rather small screen was revealed. The Showcase on Melrose was similar to this. Big front wall, small screen.
The Century Plaza was a fine theater, much like what the Astor must have been. I never would’ve known that the main auditorium at the Century Plaza was divided. It’s one of the rare times when a large auditorium has been split and the result wasn’t too horrendous. But then again, I never saw the original auditorium, which I heard was awesome.
The Astor Plaza is just another reminder of the madness of real estate development and megaplex madness. Why can’t MTV pick another spot on which to build on? Why must our great theaters be altered or demolished? Single screen theaters can be used as “loss leaders” if I’m using the correct term. Use these flagships for audiences to attend “event” films. Bring back select 70mm presentations. The cost of a 70mm print rental will be offset by large, full houses. It worked back then, it can work now.
Audiences used to remember seeing big films like the original “Star Wars” films at the Astor Plaza, or the Century Plaza, or the UA Rivoli because both the film and presentation was far and above what they would see at a neighborhood theater. I talk to people today who rave about seeing a film like “Star Wars” or “Lawrence Of Arabia” at the big theaters of my area. That’s pretty impressive, in my opinion. The theater made an impact on how they experienced the film. What a concept! Now how many people today boast about seeing films in these new 20-30 screen megaplexes? I hear more people rave about their high quality home theater system than how they experienced “Troy” on a small screen at their $10.00 a seat megaplex.
End of rant.
Rhett: Thanks for the info on the Cinema 46, even though this thread is about the Astor. :)
RE: It was 1975 and yes, they didn’t really advertise the audio so you can imagine the surprise to a 14 year old when these films blasted off the screen. (Tommy and Hindenburg).
I bet it was incredible! I remember jumping out of my seat during the 70mm presentation of “Star Wars,” from the blast of the Star Wars theme, to Luke getting attacked on the bluff by a Tuskin Raider. Quite extraordinary.
RE: research for 70MM in NJ….Cinema 46 did play 1941, in 70MM 6 track. other 70MM at the Cinema 46…in the early 80’s…Superman II, Outland, Poltergeist…I saw them all there…
Thanks for the info on these. I’m only up to 1978 on my research.
RE: If you ever get to Montclair State University, they have a good microfilm set.
I have a friend who lives in Cedar Grove, so maybe after I visit her, I can visit the Monclair State University library. Last year, I went to the movies with her and she took me to the old Cinema 23. Cool theater, except for it being chopped into more auditoriums.
I’m bummed that I didn’t go to the Astor Plaza to see “Gangs of New York” last year during my visit to Manhattan. Another fine movie theater soon to be destroyed.
Rhett:
“Re: Tommy and the Hindenburg. I can’t say they were 70MM (I didn’t either) I was commenting on the sound.”
My response isn’t meant to be sarcastic, but a movie playing in “6-Track” in the mid-‘70s would imply it being from a 70mm print.
“I don’t recall 70MM presentations from the Cinema 46, but in 1975 those 2 films (Tommy being the first) introduced me to a whole new level of moviegoing…being a stereophinic track.They had 4 track stereo presentations or possibly 6 track.”
“Tommy” was more than likely presented in Quintaphonic Sound a 4-channel stereo mix. A buddy of mine recalls seeing it at the old Orange (CA) Cinedome and being blown away by the soundtrack.
“The Hindenburg” is one of those mystery titles in regards to its soundtrack. I don’t remember seeing any indications of “4-track” stereo presentations in the papers of the day…at least not yet. I spoke to director Robert Wise a few years ago, and he said there were no 70mm prints made of the film. That of course doesn’t mean that possibly 35mm mag stereo prints were made.
“In my research there’s really no advertising of the audio.”
The 1970s was a strange time for presentation notations in the newspapers, as you’ve seen. Every once in a while, you could see an indication of what a film was being played in, i.e. “4-track” or _“4-channel” 35mm presentations. Most of the time, presentation was left to 70mm or Universal’s Sensurround (for a short time).
The first 70mm presentation that I can remember was “Star Wars” at the Orange Plitt City Center Theater. I saw “Gone With The Wind” in the mid-‘70s when there were a number of 70mm re-releases of that film, but I don’t recall when I exactly saw it or which theater. I was pretty young at the time.
Original Post: “There was a theater by me in NJ called the Cinema 46 and in 1975 they played Tommy and The Hindenburg in 6 track. I still never heard anything like it since.”
posted by rhett on Apr 29, 2004 at 7:26am
Response: Recently, I’ve been doing microfilm research on the New York City/New Jersey areas. My focus has been on 70mm presentation, mainly in Manhattan.
It seems that the Cinema 46 was a premiere house for certain major films, with the Bellevue being the other one. There were 70mm runs of “The Sound Of Music” and “Logan’s Run” at the Bellevue, for instance. However, I’ve found no record of “Tommy” or “The Hindenburg” having played in 70mm in 1975—especially “The Hindenburg.” “Tommy” was re-released in 70mm in 1977.
During my research with Michael Coate, we haven’t found proof that “The Hindenburg” played in 70mm. Do you have access to an ad in the New Jersey newspapers of 1975 that might show what format these two films played in? Thanks.
William,
I live fairly close to this theater and I actually went inside after church services concluded. The theater from the lobby to the auditorium seems intact. The University has kept it in very good condition, which I think is more impressive than how some modern theater chains keep their own properties.
The auditorium is big, but I’m not sure how many people it seats. There are two aisles on the outside of the seating area. Where the screen was, a stage has been set up for sermons and live band performances.
The box office still has the original ticketing machine mechanisms intact. I did not get an opportunity to visit the projection booth, but I’m surprised they still have the 35/70mm projectors there.
Can you please email me @ ? When my old computer crashed, I lost your address. Many thanks. Bill K.