To quote: “Barco laser projection selected to power side-walls illumination in cinematic immersive experience.”
N.B. Cinionic was acquired by Barco, and “Following the [2023] transaction and from 2024 onwards […] will be fully integrated into Barco’s Cinema business unit.”
According to the linked page, 20.20 Limited were responsible for the creation/design of the “Luxe” brand identity; and in relation to the OLS, were “in charge of setting the design for the public spaces, brand communication, and storytelling.”
To quote: “Working with 20:20 design studio we developed the concept for lighting one of the most important remaining picture houses from the golden era of cinema. From arrival in the foyer, to the auditorium and into the Oscar’s Bar the design embraced the art deco architecture and famous 30’s picture glamour.”
The entrance matting system comprises: “bronze anodised INTRAform Low Profile combined with graduating tones of grey and blue INTRAlux Elite in a stunning chevron design [to create] a striking first impression and echoes the building’s art deco features.”
“The works comprised of the soft strip, structural openings and asbestos removal to the main auditorium, back of house, roof void and basement areas prior to fit works completed in Phase 2.”
Project duration was 30 weeks with a contract value of £1.8m.
An article on p24 of the Kinematograph Weekly, Thursday 7th January 1960 titled “Preparing The Empire for ‘Ben-Hur’–Special problems required drastic alterations” contains quite a bit of information on the 1959 alterations made for “Ben Hur.”
Some of the key points:
Seating capacity was reduced by 1000 to 1725. (?–albeit the exact count is rather moot now…)
Projection throw was reduced to 78ft.
The new screen was a Superla pearl, 56ft. wide (width of projected image 52ft.)
For acoustic isolation, the new booth positioned in the rear stalls was built with “two shells.” The inner was built on piers down to foundations to isolate it from the main building structure. The article notes this was successful, as only during changeovers could faint sounds generated within be heard during quiet scenes, if seated nearby.
Water cooling was required for the arc and projectors.
Other changes included covering the new booth and disused stalls with “wine-coloured non-flam silk.”
The general contractor was G.E. Wallis, ventilation/plumbing by J. Jeffreys and Co and A.E. Mohring was consulting engineer (all same as the 1962 reconstruction.)
The architect for the scheme was George Coles (!) (err… same as the 1962 reconstruction.)
The article notes that “Ben-Hur” would be the last film to play at the Empire, with its run anticipated to last 12-15 months, upon which “the theatre was to be demolished and replaced with a smaller cinema.” Of course, literally speaking, this turned out to not quite be the case–though it would be no exaggeration to describe the 1962 reconstruction scheme as “drastic!”
To quote: “A 4DX installation for a 200-seat auditorium runs a whopping $1 million.
“The business model is such that the company shares the costs — meaning the exhibitor’s portion is still $500,000. Then the theater charges a premium — an average of $8 — over the regular ticket price, and 4DX and the exhibitor splits that premium.”
(Obviously, these figures are out of date.)
It’s not clear whether this cost includes typical building work needed for a conversion, such as alterations to the stadia stepping, structural reinforcement required for the additional loads imposed, or forming a room to house the invisible parts of the 4DX system (e.g., liquid for fog FX, scents, etc.)
I completely agree with you that ideally a 4DX auditorium would feature a large format screen (with high-end RGB laser projection/Atmos sound system) but it should be clear why a less ambitious scheme is more likely…
Re.: Regal Stonestown Theatre, it might be better if I respond to your comments on its own Cinema Treasures page… (will do this later…)
Re: ScreenX: It’s a quite a neat system, but basically seems to be a way of giving a kind of “IMAX” experience in a secondary auditorium, in the sense of filling peripheral vision (which, for the right scenes, does give the perception of motion.) The small sidewall projectors limit the quality of the extended parts of the picture, albeit this is not so important as the main screen. Also, IME ScreenX scenes tend to be only a small part of a feature, and you obviously need to sit some distance from the main screen for the sidewalls to be substantially visible. However, a combined 4DX/ScreenX-equipped auditorium–which do exist, branded “Ultra 4DX”–might be interesting…
The link Zappomatic posted to the video showing the installation of the IMAX screen is no longer working.
However, it’s also been posted by Cineworld on Facebook.
Some comments:
It appears that Maeve Contractors (IMAX conversion, 2018 Cineworld refurbishment, etc.) were again involved in this.
The numerous shakers (to reduce laser speckle) can be seen mounted off the screen frame.
Diagonal members of the primary roof truss can be seen boxed out just behind the sides of the screen frame, as well as two trusses either side. (More on this to come in another post, referencing a 1928 Architectural Review article.)
With the screen removed, it’s more obvious just how far into the former stalls the acoustic wall behind the screen is.
Was IMAX’s spray-painted coating pre-applied to the screen? My understanding is that for the largest scale IMAX venues it has to be done in-situ, because there is not enough space in the manufacturing facility(/ies) to hang the screen. Perhaps this applies to 1.43 ratio screens where there is insufficient height; it can certainly be seen in videos of screen replacements over at the BFI showing the computer-controlled rig used.
Having attended a few performances since the installation of the replacement screen:
Perhaps surprisingly, I couldn’t discern any substantive difference in picture quality, e.g., brightness.
The projection had “developed” an issue where a grid pattern of boxes that were of lower illumination could be seen across the screen. It was more noticeable in high illuminated uniform areas of the picture. This problem appears to have been resolved.
Possibly, some other subtle digital artifacts have been reduced.
Additional comments:
During one performance, due to a particularly irritating person sitting in the adjacent seat, I moved to the far back audience left.
When seated centrally, the centre-to-edge brightness loss remains. However, in this off-centre seating position, the opposite side of the screen became relatively brighter, and hence is caused by the gain/directionality of the screen material.
There are four Tannoy speakers mounted on the rear wall under the booth level overhang. It turns out that these are fill speakers for the rear surrounds, and are effective. For example, foley panned from the left side speaker to the left surround speaker could be perceived as intended.
Finally, the seating in the IMAX auditorium, particularly in the “sweet spot” central area, is getting tired with one or two cases of poor quality attempts at reupholstering them. AFAIK the supplier (Seating Concepts) is no longer in business. On all occasions, the auditorium was also in need of a full clean.
Terry: Absolutely agree! It would definitely be interesting to experience 4DX with a “larger format” presentation. The largest 4DX opened this year at Regal (aka Cineworld) Times Square with a ~60ft. wide screen.
Alas this 4DX conversion was never going to be that, a case of pushing the available space to the limit to fit everything in, including the biggest possible screen… 30ft. or so wide! (Albeit the screen feels a bit bigger than it might, especially in the front half of the auditorium, where the seats are relatively closely positioned.)
I visited the 4DX yesterday to see “Twisters.” A very average movie, but one that seemed ideal for 4DX, and tickets were £4 (National Cinema Day.)
As Zappomatic mentions, the seating is now upholstered in black.
4DX comes in different versions and generations, varying in terms of seat motion options and environmental FX. An up to date list is available on CJ4DPLEX’s site.
On opening, Leicester Square’s 4DX seemed to feature the premium options. I suspect that the upholstery simply “bolts on,” keeping the same base units. “Warm air” (from the headrest) is one of the newer options. I didn’t notice this, although it could simply be a question of connecting in this option to the existing air vents in the seats.
Rear array speakers have been upgraded; they were originally Klipsch, but are now a coaxial model from MAG Audio.
Not sure if the projection or screen speakers have been upgraded, although both were better than I remembered from my last visit, some years ago. They were certainly satisfactory with good screen illumination, and dialogue seemed to be at reference level. As the seats include shakers, any lack of sub-bass/LFE capability was offset, although a few times at peak levels “something” on the left of the auditorium audibly vibrated. I don’t think anyone could complain that the experience isn’t “visceral” enough…
4DX seating motion was very well programmed for “Twisters.” If you don’t enjoy being jolted almost out of your seat, then it’s not for you! The “Fog” environmental FX (i.e., smoke machines on the stage, either side of the screen) also worked well. I had already seen “Twisters” in IMAX, but 4DX was actually a better option.
One flight of stairs up from the 4DX are “Unisex” toilets–three cubicles–which I don’t previously remember. They feature natural lighting, being under the pavement lights ahead of the building’s frontage on Leicester Square. The fit-out is per Cineworld’s “house style” with Mitsubishi “Jet Towel” hand dryers.
Finally, in the spirit of present-day concessions decanting, someone’s popcorn was scattered onto on side of the stage. Possibly, this was caused by holding their popcorn container during seat motion… but it didn’t look like it had happened by mistake!
IMAX with Laser was installed (with the 70mm GT projection retained.) However, IMAX’s “CoLA” (Commercial Laser) single projection system was installed, rather than the dual projection system (Laser GT.) It does not support 1.43:1 (max. height is 1.9:1.)
I have not revisited the progress (or otherwise) of the above-mentioned redevelopment scheme, though anything “office-led” would seem less viable in today’s “post-COVID” world.
Thanks for the info–I only just found out about this via a YouTube comment.
An expert is quoted as saying it’s unlikely to reopen as the landlord (different to the rest of the site) has had enough and wants to take back the space. https://www.screendaily.com/news/cineworlds-relationship-with-bruised-uk-landlords-in-the-spotlight-as-leicester-square-4dx-screen-boarded-up-exclusive/5182071.article
1-4 LSQ is owned by Criterion Capital, who also own the Trocadero. As the article notes, they Cineworld were in dispute over rent arrears for Picturehouse Central, and the Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the landlord. Presumably, this could be a factor in the apparent breakdown of the relationship.
Criterion seem to have a slightly different approach to other property companies. The Trocadero, in the process of conversion to a hotel, was largely out of action for a protracted period. Also, prime space fronting Coventry Street was used as a very large tourist tat shop…
If the cinema is not going to be repurposed any time soon, then one might ponder the motivation, not least given the costs involved in the 4DX conversion…
(N.B. In saying “Criterion Capital” and “Cineworld” here, I’m ignoring whatever mess of subsidiaries etc. there may be.)
The plans are from FDA Architecture, with the client listed as Empire Design. (?) According to their website, FDA Architecture were also involved with The Cinema at Selfridges.
Seating capacity is marked on the plans, but the low resolution renders them virtually illegible! I think Screen 1 is given as 221 fixed + 6 disabled + 13 VIP; total 240. This is at odds with the current figure of 213 regular seats given in the current Cinema Treasures description; I have no idea which is correct…
Screen widths as scaled off the plans are ~10m (= ~33ft.) wide for the Dolby Cinema and ~9.5 (= ~31ft.) for Screen 2.
Not sure if this therefore qualifies as the smallest Dolby Cinema screen size; it surely must be one of them.
“Cineworld and certain of its subsidiaries (collectively, the “Group Chapter 11 Companies”) have commenced Chapter 11 cases in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas (the “Court”).”
“[If they’re going to operate they will] clean up the under-performing complexes and either sell them off or do something with them. But that’s not where IMAX screens are — IMAX screens are all in the top-performing complexes.”
Clearly, in a world where “tentpole” releases still drawn in crowds, whilst streaming is snapping on the heels of mid-budget titles, a cinema with 3 premium format screens, one of which is exceptional, and 6 “studio” sized auditoria, is configured in a way that is more suitable than “megaplexes”…
Lionel: I never visited in single screen form, but I can say…
In Screen 2, the screen speaker system was JBL 4675’s with JBL 4688 “Triple Chamber Bandpass” subwoofers. (Later, JBL/Harman faced litigation from Bose for patent infringement, lost, and the TCB design products discontinued.) As you’d imagine, the surrounds were 8330’s.
No baffle wall, but (standard practice today) the wall behind the screen was covered with absorptive material (Rockwool) to control acoustics (i.e., sound bouncing off the unperforated parts of the screen to the wall behind, back and forth.)
Dolby Digital, DTS and SDDS all supported.
Very good sound.
Regarding “Return of the Jedi;” this was on the cusp of improvements to the B-chain, including the THX programme and the JBL 4765’s with (then) cutting-edge high power drivers and “bi-radial” horns, c.f., the old “cell horn” (HF section) designs, as in the old Vitavox, Altec Voice of the Theatre, etc.
Over the weekend, I did visit the Screen 1 (Dolby Cinema) in the new OWE, which features a very good Atmos install. Write-up to follow on its Cinema Treasures page!
Thanks for your fascinating story and link to photos.
I’m finally back out and about, and over the weekend, I saw this building (in finished form) for the first time in daylight. I have to say that I was very surprised–there is a real depth to the facing materials. The faience tiles positively gleam depending on the angle they’re lit/viewed. It really must be seen in person.
Agree with you about the demolition, but try to be realistic…
The Wall Street Journal reports that Cineworld are preparing to file for bankruptcy. The writing has been on the wall, given mounting debts. Will be interesting to see the future of this and their other flagship locations.
Seanf: The single laser (“Commercial Laser”) IMAX projection system is excellent; except that, for reasons presumably known only to IMAX, it supports 1.9:1 only. (Thinking about it, perhaps the “dual lens” used with the single projection system for 3D makes it unviable to also have a changeover to a vertical anamorphic lens for 1.43:1?)
Going by LF Examiner, the screen size at this venue is 71ft. wide and 51ft. high. Too bad, then, that the single laser projection was installed, as 1.43:1 continues to be used for selected releases.
Whilst this is an existent site, parent company Cineworld Group have opened new builds with 1.43:1 screens with the single IMAX with Laser projection system installed. A recent example is Cineworld Ashford, the IMAX auditorium of which (in a newly-built extension) only opened a few months ago; screen size is also at the ~70ft. mark, which is within the capability of the single laser projection system. All a bit odd…
It looks like there screen was just left blank? Very poor, and it looks ridiculous in that auditorium.
I know what you mean about what looks like a veritable never-ending “sea” of seats. Interestingly, the Upper Circle of the OLS actually gained a couple of rows, with the circle’s layout revised (no full width cross gangway/new central wide vomitorium,) and the last row is now up against the rear wall.
A market report by CBRE (a “Global Commercial Real Estate Services” company) is included in the Documents, which says:
“[There has been a] lack of commercial proposals from rival operators since Odeon announced its reasons for not proceeding with the development. Ultimately, a site of this scale in this location is no longer in keeping with current operator demands; an issue exacerbated still further by the 2020 outbreak of COVID-19 and the effects that this has had on the sector.”
In view of the Premises Licence being issued in July 2020, per my previous post, one can only assume that this is a direct consequence of COVID.
Thankfully, not a great loss–Odeon’s scheme, after all, was no compensation for the ruination and subsequent demolition of the majestic piece of modernism that was the “large format” flagship cinema which once stood proud on this site.
davidcoppock: The main façade was not retained. Ground floor is now retail with 2 floors of apartments above that have windows facing onto the High Street.
To be fair, particularly upon closure, the main façade wasn’t much to look at. However, its replacement is remarkable for its complete absence of elegance.
Having a quick look at the rest, it seems the auditorium block was demolished, but the building that was between the vestibule and the auditorium seems to have been repurposed, albeit with extensive alterations.
Parts of its original frontage can be seen from the High Street, behind the single storey building that is to the left of where the cinema’s main entrance was.
HowardBHaas: Good to hear that it does offer a “premium” experience.
It’s not that there is no difference between operators' own-brand “Premium Large Format” (such as “RPX”) auditoria and “regular.” As you say, you would expect a relatively big screen, high-end projection/sound, etc.
For a proprietary premium format such as ScreenX (with the image extended along the sidewalls using additional projectors)–if the contract (with CJ4DPLEX of South Korea–yes, the “dreaded” 4DX is from the same company!) is terminated, then ScreenX versions of releases (which contain the additional image data for the sidewall projection) won’t be supplied.
Therefore, (even if retained) the sidewall projection can’t be used. By definition, it’s no longer a “ScreenX” auditorium.
Whereas, removing “RPX” branding would make no difference if nothing else has changed–the auditorium would still provide the same experience…
Maintaining a “premium” experience does require upgrading to meet current expectations. Perhaps that explains what’s happened here; for example, if the RPX lacks Dolby Atmos? This is certainly specified for parent company Cineworld’s “Superscreen” PLF own-brand auditoria.
With regard to ScreenX projection quality:
CJ 4DPLEX names Cinionic as a new global laser projection partner for ScreenX.
To quote: “Barco laser projection selected to power side-walls illumination in cinematic immersive experience.”
N.B. Cinionic was acquired by Barco, and “Following the [2023] transaction and from 2024 onwards […] will be fully integrated into Barco’s Cinema business unit.”
ALSD Spotlight Awards 2019 – Alternative Premium Seating Product or Space.
According to the linked page, 20.20 Limited were responsible for the creation/design of the “Luxe” brand identity; and in relation to the OLS, were “in charge of setting the design for the public spaces, brand communication, and storytelling.”
Kate & Sam Lighting Designers Ltd.
To quote: “Working with 20:20 design studio we developed the concept for lighting one of the most important remaining picture houses from the golden era of cinema. From arrival in the foyer, to the auditorium and into the Oscar’s Bar the design embraced the art deco architecture and famous 30’s picture glamour.”
Intra Systems – Entrance Matting System.
The entrance matting system comprises: “bronze anodised INTRAform Low Profile combined with graduating tones of grey and blue INTRAlux Elite in a stunning chevron design [to create] a striking first impression and echoes the building’s art deco features.”
Pier Contractors Limited - 2020 Brochure.
From p8 of the linked PDF:
“The works comprised of the soft strip, structural openings and asbestos removal to the main auditorium, back of house, roof void and basement areas prior to fit works completed in Phase 2.”
Project duration was 30 weeks with a contract value of £1.8m.
This is in addition to the replacement of the old asbestos sheet roof with Kingspan insulated panels which had been completed prior to the 2018 refurbishment.
An article on p24 of the Kinematograph Weekly, Thursday 7th January 1960 titled “Preparing The Empire for ‘Ben-Hur’–Special problems required drastic alterations” contains quite a bit of information on the 1959 alterations made for “Ben Hur.”
Some of the key points:
The article notes that “Ben-Hur” would be the last film to play at the Empire, with its run anticipated to last 12-15 months, upon which “the theatre was to be demolished and replaced with a smaller cinema.” Of course, literally speaking, this turned out to not quite be the case–though it would be no exaggeration to describe the 1962 reconstruction scheme as “drastic!”
Hi Terry,
IIRC the cost of a 4DX installation for a “typically” sized auditorium runs into 7 figures.
Quickly searching on Google: The Hollywood Reporter - “CinemaCon: 4DX Targeting U.S. Market” - April 2013.
To quote: “A 4DX installation for a 200-seat auditorium runs a whopping $1 million.
“The business model is such that the company shares the costs — meaning the exhibitor’s portion is still $500,000. Then the theater charges a premium — an average of $8 — over the regular ticket price, and 4DX and the exhibitor splits that premium.”
(Obviously, these figures are out of date.)
It’s not clear whether this cost includes typical building work needed for a conversion, such as alterations to the stadia stepping, structural reinforcement required for the additional loads imposed, or forming a room to house the invisible parts of the 4DX system (e.g., liquid for fog FX, scents, etc.)
I completely agree with you that ideally a 4DX auditorium would feature a large format screen (with high-end RGB laser projection/Atmos sound system) but it should be clear why a less ambitious scheme is more likely…
Re.: Regal Stonestown Theatre, it might be better if I respond to your comments on its own Cinema Treasures page… (will do this later…)
Re: ScreenX: It’s a quite a neat system, but basically seems to be a way of giving a kind of “IMAX” experience in a secondary auditorium, in the sense of filling peripheral vision (which, for the right scenes, does give the perception of motion.) The small sidewall projectors limit the quality of the extended parts of the picture, albeit this is not so important as the main screen. Also, IME ScreenX scenes tend to be only a small part of a feature, and you obviously need to sit some distance from the main screen for the sidewalls to be substantially visible. However, a combined 4DX/ScreenX-equipped auditorium–which do exist, branded “Ultra 4DX”–might be interesting…
The link Zappomatic posted to the video showing the installation of the IMAX screen is no longer working.
However, it’s also been posted by Cineworld on Facebook.
Some comments:
Having attended a few performances since the installation of the replacement screen:
Additional comments:
Finally, the seating in the IMAX auditorium, particularly in the “sweet spot” central area, is getting tired with one or two cases of poor quality attempts at reupholstering them. AFAIK the supplier (Seating Concepts) is no longer in business. On all occasions, the auditorium was also in need of a full clean.
Terry: Absolutely agree! It would definitely be interesting to experience 4DX with a “larger format” presentation. The largest 4DX opened this year at Regal (aka Cineworld) Times Square with a ~60ft. wide screen.
Alas this 4DX conversion was never going to be that, a case of pushing the available space to the limit to fit everything in, including the biggest possible screen… 30ft. or so wide! (Albeit the screen feels a bit bigger than it might, especially in the front half of the auditorium, where the seats are relatively closely positioned.)
I visited the 4DX yesterday to see “Twisters.” A very average movie, but one that seemed ideal for 4DX, and tickets were £4 (National Cinema Day.)
As Zappomatic mentions, the seating is now upholstered in black.
4DX comes in different versions and generations, varying in terms of seat motion options and environmental FX. An up to date list is available on CJ4DPLEX’s site.
On opening, Leicester Square’s 4DX seemed to feature the premium options. I suspect that the upholstery simply “bolts on,” keeping the same base units. “Warm air” (from the headrest) is one of the newer options. I didn’t notice this, although it could simply be a question of connecting in this option to the existing air vents in the seats.
Rear array speakers have been upgraded; they were originally Klipsch, but are now a coaxial model from MAG Audio.
Not sure if the projection or screen speakers have been upgraded, although both were better than I remembered from my last visit, some years ago. They were certainly satisfactory with good screen illumination, and dialogue seemed to be at reference level. As the seats include shakers, any lack of sub-bass/LFE capability was offset, although a few times at peak levels “something” on the left of the auditorium audibly vibrated. I don’t think anyone could complain that the experience isn’t “visceral” enough…
4DX seating motion was very well programmed for “Twisters.” If you don’t enjoy being jolted almost out of your seat, then it’s not for you! The “Fog” environmental FX (i.e., smoke machines on the stage, either side of the screen) also worked well. I had already seen “Twisters” in IMAX, but 4DX was actually a better option.
One flight of stairs up from the 4DX are “Unisex” toilets–three cubicles–which I don’t previously remember. They feature natural lighting, being under the pavement lights ahead of the building’s frontage on Leicester Square. The fit-out is per Cineworld’s “house style” with Mitsubishi “Jet Towel” hand dryers.
Finally, in the spirit of present-day concessions decanting, someone’s popcorn was scattered onto on side of the stage. Possibly, this was caused by holding their popcorn container during seat motion… but it didn’t look like it had happened by mistake!
Whatever was going on with Cineworld over the past few years, there’s an “end game”–and it’s an $35m payoff to Mooky Greidinger and colleagues:
Cineworld CEO and top execs secure near $35 million exit payout.
This isn’t what happens to “ordinary folk” when maxxing out all their credit cards!
As for The Empire:
“Cineworld have a lease with 60 years left on it, that’s the landlords next opportunity to take the building back on the basis of a conversion.”
(From comment by theatreofvarieties on Sept 20, 2017.)
Also, IIRC the Casino lease has been extended to 2040.
So, thankfully, I think it’s safe for the foreseeable.
Plans granted for apartment hotel/community facility.
IMAX with Laser was installed (with the 70mm GT projection retained.) However, IMAX’s “CoLA” (Commercial Laser) single projection system was installed, rather than the dual projection system (Laser GT.) It does not support 1.43:1 (max. height is 1.9:1.)
I have not revisited the progress (or otherwise) of the above-mentioned redevelopment scheme, though anything “office-led” would seem less viable in today’s “post-COVID” world.
theatreofvarieties: Many thanks for offering the original Empire 1 seats. I’d love to have one… how can we go about arranging this?
Zappomatic: Welcome back?!
Thanks for the info–I only just found out about this via a YouTube comment.
1-4 LSQ is owned by Criterion Capital, who also own the Trocadero. As the article notes, they Cineworld were in dispute over rent arrears for Picturehouse Central, and the Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the landlord. Presumably, this could be a factor in the apparent breakdown of the relationship.
Criterion seem to have a slightly different approach to other property companies. The Trocadero, in the process of conversion to a hotel, was largely out of action for a protracted period. Also, prime space fronting Coventry Street was used as a very large tourist tat shop…
If the cinema is not going to be repurposed any time soon, then one might ponder the motivation, not least given the costs involved in the 4DX conversion…
(N.B. In saying “Criterion Capital” and “Cineworld” here, I’m ignoring whatever mess of subsidiaries etc. there may be.)
The premises licence includes plans on the last page.
The plans are from FDA Architecture, with the client listed as Empire Design. (?) According to their website, FDA Architecture were also involved with The Cinema at Selfridges.
Seating capacity is marked on the plans, but the low resolution renders them virtually illegible! I think Screen 1 is given as 221 fixed + 6 disabled + 13 VIP; total 240. This is at odds with the current figure of 213 regular seats given in the current Cinema Treasures description; I have no idea which is correct…
Screen widths as scaled off the plans are ~10m (= ~33ft.) wide for the Dolby Cinema and ~9.5 (= ~31ft.) for Screen 2.
Not sure if this therefore qualifies as the smallest Dolby Cinema screen size; it surely must be one of them.
Cineworld have announced:
“Cineworld and certain of its subsidiaries (collectively, the “Group Chapter 11 Companies”) have commenced Chapter 11 cases in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas (the “Court”).”
Source: Cineworld Group plc - Announcement.
The above link is to a newly launched website pertaining to the proceedings, under the domain cineworldstrong.com, a somewhat odd name.
Meanwhile, IMAX’s CFO states that IMAX sites operate under a master lease agreement that covers all of an operator’s locations. She goes on to suggest:
“[If they’re going to operate they will] clean up the under-performing complexes and either sell them off or do something with them. But that’s not where IMAX screens are — IMAX screens are all in the top-performing complexes.”
Clearly, in a world where “tentpole” releases still drawn in crowds, whilst streaming is snapping on the heels of mid-budget titles, a cinema with 3 premium format screens, one of which is exceptional, and 6 “studio” sized auditoria, is configured in a way that is more suitable than “megaplexes”…
Lionel: I never visited in single screen form, but I can say…
In Screen 2, the screen speaker system was JBL 4675’s with JBL 4688 “Triple Chamber Bandpass” subwoofers. (Later, JBL/Harman faced litigation from Bose for patent infringement, lost, and the TCB design products discontinued.) As you’d imagine, the surrounds were 8330’s.
No baffle wall, but (standard practice today) the wall behind the screen was covered with absorptive material (Rockwool) to control acoustics (i.e., sound bouncing off the unperforated parts of the screen to the wall behind, back and forth.)
Dolby Digital, DTS and SDDS all supported.
Very good sound.
Regarding “Return of the Jedi;” this was on the cusp of improvements to the B-chain, including the THX programme and the JBL 4765’s with (then) cutting-edge high power drivers and “bi-radial” horns, c.f., the old “cell horn” (HF section) designs, as in the old Vitavox, Altec Voice of the Theatre, etc.
Over the weekend, I did visit the Screen 1 (Dolby Cinema) in the new OWE, which features a very good Atmos install. Write-up to follow on its Cinema Treasures page!
Thanks for your fascinating story and link to photos.
HowardBHaas: Good to see your photos!
I’m finally back out and about, and over the weekend, I saw this building (in finished form) for the first time in daylight. I have to say that I was very surprised–there is a real depth to the facing materials. The faience tiles positively gleam depending on the angle they’re lit/viewed. It really must be seen in person.
Agree with you about the demolition, but try to be realistic…
Biffaskin: Finishes of the new building’s façade include blue faience tiles and “crystal white” granite cladding.
Full details are available in the following planning application under “Facade Material Samples”:
18/02417/ADFULL – Details of facing materials samples pursuant to Condition 28 of planning permission dated 29 November 2016.
The Wall Street Journal reports that Cineworld are preparing to file for bankruptcy. The writing has been on the wall, given mounting debts. Will be interesting to see the future of this and their other flagship locations.
Seanf: The single laser (“Commercial Laser”) IMAX projection system is excellent; except that, for reasons presumably known only to IMAX, it supports 1.9:1 only. (Thinking about it, perhaps the “dual lens” used with the single projection system for 3D makes it unviable to also have a changeover to a vertical anamorphic lens for 1.43:1?)
Going by LF Examiner, the screen size at this venue is 71ft. wide and 51ft. high. Too bad, then, that the single laser projection was installed, as 1.43:1 continues to be used for selected releases.
Whilst this is an existent site, parent company Cineworld Group have opened new builds with 1.43:1 screens with the single IMAX with Laser projection system installed. A recent example is Cineworld Ashford, the IMAX auditorium of which (in a newly-built extension) only opened a few months ago; screen size is also at the ~70ft. mark, which is within the capability of the single laser projection system. All a bit odd…
Exterior footage of The Empire, Leicester Square in 1896 (!) with “Lumiere Cinematographe” signage (and yes, horses and carts to boot…)
HowardBHaas: Those are some nice photos!
It looks like there screen was just left blank? Very poor, and it looks ridiculous in that auditorium.
I know what you mean about what looks like a veritable never-ending “sea” of seats. Interestingly, the Upper Circle of the OLS actually gained a couple of rows, with the circle’s layout revised (no full width cross gangway/new central wide vomitorium,) and the last row is now up against the rear wall.
Planning permission (application submitted April 2021) for an alternative use of the cinema demise granted as below:
21/02728/FULLH - Use of part ground, part lower ground and part basement as an art gallery (Class F1).
A market report by CBRE (a “Global Commercial Real Estate Services” company) is included in the Documents, which says:
“[There has been a] lack of commercial proposals from rival operators since Odeon announced its reasons for not proceeding with the development. Ultimately, a site of this scale in this location is no longer in keeping with current operator demands; an issue exacerbated still further by the 2020 outbreak of COVID-19 and the effects that this has had on the sector.”
In view of the Premises Licence being issued in July 2020, per my previous post, one can only assume that this is a direct consequence of COVID.
Thankfully, not a great loss–Odeon’s scheme, after all, was no compensation for the ruination and subsequent demolition of the majestic piece of modernism that was the “large format” flagship cinema which once stood proud on this site.
davidcoppock: The main façade was not retained. Ground floor is now retail with 2 floors of apartments above that have windows facing onto the High Street.
To be fair, particularly upon closure, the main façade wasn’t much to look at. However, its replacement is remarkable for its complete absence of elegance.
Having a quick look at the rest, it seems the auditorium block was demolished, but the building that was between the vestibule and the auditorium seems to have been repurposed, albeit with extensive alterations.
Parts of its original frontage can be seen from the High Street, behind the single storey building that is to the left of where the cinema’s main entrance was.
HowardBHaas: Good to hear that it does offer a “premium” experience.
It’s not that there is no difference between operators' own-brand “Premium Large Format” (such as “RPX”) auditoria and “regular.” As you say, you would expect a relatively big screen, high-end projection/sound, etc.
For a proprietary premium format such as ScreenX (with the image extended along the sidewalls using additional projectors)–if the contract (with CJ4DPLEX of South Korea–yes, the “dreaded” 4DX is from the same company!) is terminated, then ScreenX versions of releases (which contain the additional image data for the sidewall projection) won’t be supplied.
Therefore, (even if retained) the sidewall projection can’t be used. By definition, it’s no longer a “ScreenX” auditorium.
Whereas, removing “RPX” branding would make no difference if nothing else has changed–the auditorium would still provide the same experience…
Maintaining a “premium” experience does require upgrading to meet current expectations. Perhaps that explains what’s happened here; for example, if the RPX lacks Dolby Atmos? This is certainly specified for parent company Cineworld’s “Superscreen” PLF own-brand auditoria.