Baronet and Coronet Theatre

Dear CConnelly, as someone who enjoyed on-site porn-viewing, so to speak, for many years, I must try to contradict you. One didn’t go to porn houses for the pleasures of bon ton, in decor or hygene. Rather, they were places to disappear into (as are most movie theaters) for the express pleasures of sexual fantasy—and, sometimes, sexual contact, in male-for-male theaters at least. Alas, that last has been lost, now that porn-viwing has become, mostly, a stay-at-home occupation. I sympathize with those who found the theaters unisghtly additions to their nighborhoods, but the theaters had their place, one, for me at any rate, sadly lost.

AEB

What kind of run was the Tivoli on before it became the Adonis. I can answer some questions about the Adonis, I once worked for the owner who at the time had the Cinema Village and DW Griffith.

Porn saved the Tivoli for 20 years more or less intact. Otherwise it would have been demolished or gutted and converted to a supermarket as soon as they stopped showing general release film in 1970. In the end, it did come down, but it’s life had been extended.

CConnolly – there was a good thing to an old theatre going porn – as long as the owner was able to make a few bucks with porn the theatre at least remained in existance with hope that it would be rediscovered. Without porn houses these days as soon as a theatre becomes obsolete for regular film they are either gutted for other uses or demolished.

The D.W. is still open under a different name and showing an Asian film series.

Today only megaplexes are being built by the major exhibitors, and require a huge site, something else in short supply on the upper east side. A small chain or independent operator who wanted to build a 3 or 4 screen art house on a modest sized site or convert an existing space would probably not have enough clout to get the zoning changed.

The D.W. Griffith became the 59th Street East Cinema in April of ‘89, Vincent, and is presently known and operated as the ImaginAsian, a venue focusing year-round on films with a related cultural leaning.

It’s amazing to think that theaters on the East side would show porn. And yes, the advent of DVD has thankfully done away with the old style porn theater. Who’s going to go into a dark and disgusting theater when they can watch this krap in their own home or on their PC?

I would think someone would ask for a rezoning for a movie theater. Given the nature of the population on the East side (educated, wealthy, etc.) an art house (you’d think) would flourish over there.

I should have said ‘4 screens’. The Manhattan Twin, though I forget the name of it at the time, had regular porn on one side and gay on the other. The D.W.Griffith was the Cine Malibu and played porn. Closer to 3rd Ave on the north side of the street next to McCreedys shoe store was the Lido East, another porn house. After it closed they made a Mexican restaurant called Zona Rosa in there, and now I think it is a carpet store.

As far as changing the zoning back to allow theatres, I would imagine it would have to be done the same way as it was done earlier – the residents would have to get the local community board to prod the city council to make the changes. A developer of a large project may also be able to petition for a zoning change on a particular piece of property.

br91975 – As I recall from conversations with Mr. Geller, the architect of the Cinema 1 2 3, the zoning area applied to the area of 1st Ave. west to Madison, and 57th St north to 79th St. The First & 62nd theatre sits on the corner, yet the entrance and address is on the side-street, instead of the more desirable avenue.

When we were renovating the C1&2 in ‘87, the projection booth for the third theatre was to have been centered on a mezzannine above the auditorium entrance. This was disallowed by the DOB as it was adding square-footage to the building. We were allowed to put the booth on a raised platform 5’ off the floor since the space below, a little more than 4' high, was not considered “usable” space, therefore it did not add square-footage.

Responding to your most recent post, Dave-Bronx – how were the First & 62nd Street Cinemas allowed to come into existance sometime around 1991 with the re-zoning prohibiting the development of new movie theatres within the neighborhood having been passed roughly some 10 years' prior?

sethkino, there will be no new movie theatres in the neighborhood due to the fact that in the late 70s or early 80s the area was re-zoned to prevent it, at the insistance of the local community board. At that time there was concern about the area becoming another Times Square, the 4 theatres on 59th St. were all porn operations. The new zoning probibited any new theatres from built, and the existing theatres could not add any square-footage to their premises, and if any of the existing theatres were heavily damaged due to fire or some other disaster they were not allowed to be re-built. As far as I know, that zoning is still in effect.

Well, I don’t know about Landmark and what theaters they own in the NY area. What I have found out is that independently owned theaters tend (overall) to be better. The owners can be film lovers and they do their best to book good fare that is in keeping with the population. A good example is the Teaneck theater in Teaneck NJ. Privately owned, the theater itself, condition wise, is not that great. But the owners know their patrons (middle class, educated Jews) and book the theater accordingly with art/independent and some commericial stuff in it’s second run usually.

I would love to run a small-ish art house with two or three screens like the New Community Cinema in Huntington, LI. Now those people know what they’re doing and to whom they are catering to and have done a splendid job.