I and familiar with and agree with everything you’ve written above about the context, history, intent, criticism and corporate economics of early 20th-century theatre design and present-day big box movie theater design. I just didn’t want to make my comments unnecessarily long, and at the time I was only responding to others thoughts about the architectural merits of the building in absolute terms. One comment had made a comparison between this theatre and an ancient Mesopotamian temple and I was saying that such an intentional ‘hommage’ was probably not the designer’s intent here. It is true that LV’s original designer may have been trying to do a little more here to ‘decorate the box’, and in my comments I did consider the context of the era in which it was designed, which was late-80’s post-modernism. I did not get into all the detail which you have in your response, but I thank you that you did.
With any building project there will always be constraints and I have dealt with them all: flood plains, constricted sites, constricted budgets, unrealistic deadlines, unrealistic clients, urban infill contexts which demand all that all the attention be placed on the facade and not the side or rear walls, etc. The bigger question is how to judge the adequacy of LV’s response to it’s constraints in absolute terms as a piece of built form in the public realm. One might try to argue that ‘theatre’ architecture should somehow be exempt from this judgment, but why should theatres get this special consideration, particularly since they are visited far more often by the general public than other ‘public’ buildings (such as libraries, courthouses, hospitals, etc)? On the contrary, one might say that movie theatres have an even higher aesthetic/architectural responsibility precisely because they are so heavily patronized. In this day and age, people’s perception of what constitutes good design is more often than not based on what they see at the shopping mall. If one wants to influence public artistic perception, this is a prime building type where one can still do it.
I still maintain this building is an architectural eyesore; it is big, it is bulky (despite the stair & box office tower massing), it has no sense of detail or articulation, and it’s attempts at decorative expression are so stripped down so as to render them trite and banal. The sideways orientation of the building to the street is awkward and impedes any visual recognition of the building’s form(s) and the attempts the designers may have made at scaling this theatre down to size. I have lived in the area since before LV was built and I have had this opinion since the first time I saw it. My feelings have nothing to do with my particularly bad experience at this theatre, although that experience has certainly focused my attention on the merits of LV continuing to operate under the adverse conditions it faces. My point is, barring any change of attitude from the MWD there aren’t many compelling arguments (profitability, community patronage, architectural preservationism, civic or neighborhood presence) for this particular building to stay. Indeed, there have been far more worthy examples of architectural excellence in Chicago that have fallen to the wrecking ball. LV (or its operator) needs to go if we are to have any hope for the civic potential of this prominent corner to be realized. Until it does, MWD and LV will remain deadlocked, and this site will remain an unsightly no-man’s land of chainlink, aging asphalt, concrete barricades, shuttered businesses and neglected landscape.
No worries – we think alike. I’m all for small business. I’d rather patronize an old renovated or well-kept classic theatre than a banal new one. I think alot of people think like you and me; otherwise there would not be a website with such a fan base as this. The problem is – and I realize you see this – Village Theatres LLC is just cashing in on this sentiment. They have no intention of living up to their responsibilities as business operators or curators/caretakers of the public trust. There’s a phrase – I’m misquoting it but it goes something like “the flag is the last refuge of a scoundrel”. Definitely applicable here. If they feel otherwise; if they feel they are being misunderstood, (and Ron Rooding if you are reading this)….then prove otherwise with your actions.
I appreciate your appreciation of ‘architecture’; and I guess LV 1-6 might appear more animated than some other multiplexes in Chicago – but then again holding multiplexes up as the standard-bearers for good architecture/design is perhaps a bit of a reach. It’s my business to know something about good architectural design – and this is not it. The Lincoln Village 1-6 was built at the trailing end of the architectural post-modern era, well after its first practitioners had abandoned the whole post-modern movement as bankrupt. Stylistically, LV may appear to be loosely quoting some form of stripped-down neo-classical motif but I am quite certain that the ‘ziggurat’ forms took no inspiration from Eqypt, Greece, Rome or Central America for that matter. More than likely those forms were someone’s uninspired attempt to disguise the large emergency exit stairs that are required for any ‘assembly’ space where alot of people may have to get out in a hurry. As the enclosed exit stairs from the upper theatres descend down the side of the building, so do the roof forms. Take away the exit stairs and you’re left with the same basic big multiplex box that you’ve got in all the other multiplexes.
I’ll quote a passage from the article cited by Redon above to sum this up:
“Almost by way of apology for the crime against cinema that Cineplex Odious committed, in 1985 they built the LV 1-6 at the other end of the parking lot. It was your typical CO monstrosity complete with a Good ‘n’ Plenty color scheme and abysmal focus.”
The old classic theaters – such as the ones that originally inspired this website – pursued their goals much more seriously and sucessfully. They hired real artisans to produce faithful (if somewhat fanciful) architectural period reproductions. They spared no expense, unlike LV 1-6 whose stripped-down architectural detail leaves everything to the imagination. LV’s time has come and gone – it has said all it had to say about architecture in the first week that it was open. Time for something more inspired to occupy this prominent site – this gateway to Lincolnwood and Rogers Park.
Village, or any other operator, opens a theatre to make a profit
Village, or any other operator, cannot ‘profit’ at the expense of patrons comfort, personal safety or safety of their personal property
Village, or any other operator, is violating Federal laws when they sell tickets to movies on the second floor and allow their escalator and elevator to go unrepaired (read the “Americans With Disabilities Act”.
Village, or any other operator, cannot violate City building and fire codes by disabling and locking emergency exit doors because they are too short-staffed to man them appropriately to prevent those who would sneak in without paying
Village, or any other operator, cannot serve foods in concession facilties that violate public health requirements
local neighborhood kids and couples certainly would not consider giving up their safety and health a fair trade for a cheap date or free popcorn on Wednesdays
I very much doubt the City (a.k.a. the Metropolitan Water District) has an opinion or a conscience either way about the success or failure of Village Theatre. The MWD doesn’t care one way or another who wants to lease their parking lot as long as they receive what the market tells them they should be receiving as fair compensation for their land. They are under no obligation to charge below-market rent just so Village can continue to operate with a derelict business model. They are not trying to force out Village as some type of vendetta, although I am sure Ron Rooding is not doing anything to win their favor as Citizen of the Year.
MWD is doing the public a favor by hastening the end of this public nuisance and architectural eyesore. This site is on a prominent corner of the public realm. The next tenant/developer for this site will certainly come up with a higher and better (and more attractive, civic-minded) use than a broken down theatre whose main entry is hidden behind a broken down carwash and whose patrons are few in number.
Ron Rooding can cry all he wants to about the ‘unfair’ increase in his parking lot rent, but this man has a long history of neglect for his properties and non-compliance with applicable codes. These are things that all of his competitors in the industry responsibly accept as requirements of operating a business. Ron should be a big boy and start realizing he needs to get with the program. Maybe if his facilities were better, he could make the income and pay the rent for parking, thus attracting more patrons and make more money while at the same time be more worthy of occupying this prominent site with his establishment.
Let us pray the future ‘owners’ to whom this building has allegedly been ‘donated’ (religious school) are fully aware of the tons of money they will have to pay for building repairs and parking fees.
You said it – as absurd as it may sound, parking at the unlit, unsecured and under-sized gravel parking lot at Thillens is now an official part of the Village Theatre’s business operations. They must think their customers are that dedicated (or insane) to walk through the mud and trees, cross busy Devon Ave, cross a canal bridge, and hike around (or over) fencing and barricades to visit their theatre. I guess you’re suggesting that the lot I parked in may have belonged to the shopping center, and that this may have been allowable up to a couple of weeks ago. Truthfully, I could not tell you who this lot actually belongs to – it is a no-man’s land adjoining the back of multiple businesses and was deserted at the time. I can’t believe anyone cares or depends upon it for their business…it probably operates much more effectively as a towing ‘trap’ profit center so that the related businesses can split the take with the towing companies. As I mentioned before I took pictures the next morning and will review them as to what the signs might have said the night I was there.
The Home Depot option is just as exiting for those inclined to risk…you can only park there until 9:30pm (and presumeably vulnerable to towing after that). Like Thillens, you have to leap over or walk a loooonnnngggg way around fencing barricades and cross 6 lanes of busy traffic on McCormick to get to the theatre.
The bottom line is that Village’s seat-of-the-pants business operations puts their customers at risk (can you imagine how fun it was to drag my family 25 miles down to 17th and Western at 11:00 pm in an icestorm?). I understand that Village is having the squeeze put on them by the MWD, but this parking fiasco (and the theatre’s building/accessibility code violations) have gone on for the better part of a year – if not longer. Ridiculous! No one in this City should knowingly operate this way….or be allowed to…
Thanks for the advice, and the referral to the Village Arts page. I meant no offense by suggesting C worked for Village Entertainment. Based on this theater owner’s response(s) to Paul, I not sure just yet if he is a wanna-be-decent owner who is ‘fighting the fight’ on behalf of the small theatre venue in the face of his many recurring business challenges, or someone who simply is manipulating his ‘facts’ to make it appear that way. Google Rod Rooding and tell me what you think….he doesn’t have much going for him in the credibility department. Whatever the case may be, he still cannot be allowed to operate his businesses in a manner that jeopardizes his patron’s health, safety and property. I deal with these issues all the time in my line of work…if the City doesn’t hold him accountable then shame on all of us.
Thanks for the comments. I’m taking it up with the Village Theatre, The Metropolitan Water District and Alderman Stone. Regarding Catherine DiM’s comments, you are right that the towing company was just doing their job. However, it is clear that Village is THE only party that CAN be held responsible, and your comments sound suspiciously sympathetic to the owner…do you work for Village Entertainment? With respect to the theatre, THEY advertise and solicit customers to attend to the movies and so it is completely incumbent upon them to provide for their customer’s health and security if the customer chooses to partake of their services. If Village Entertainment thinks they have NO responsibility to provide for this then they are flying in the face of numerous City and Fire department regulations and deserve to be shut down (as they have in a few other cities). As I mentioned in my previous post, the box office was closed on this night (due to lack of heat), their warning signs regarding parking were not clearly posted and were not visible because the doors had been propped open to let customers through to the concession stand where the tickets were being sold. The ticket attendant standing in the vestibule said nothing about parking regulations, and the same was true for the concession stand attendants. I went back the next day to inspect the warning signs (and took photographs) and I can assure you there are no warnings on the main marquee. The warning signs in the parking lot simply say that unauthorized persons will be towed, and who would not think that the only accessible parking lot immediately adjacent to the theatre that has a connecting sidewalk leading straight up to the box office was not intended to serve the theatre??? I am a first (and last) time visitor – if you were in this situation, what would you have suspected? Village Theatre has a long history of operating their properties in this manner; all you have to do is Google Ron Rooding and you will find a treasure trove of information of past legal action and negligence: bounced checks, operating a theatre without a working fire alarm, patrons being assaulted by theatre employees. Lincoln Village 1-6’s violations were clearly evident the night I was there: no working elevator (a fire and handicapped accessibility violation), emergency doors that had been disabled and locked from the inside (I personally observed this), fabric and carpet that was torn and unsanitary, concession facilities and equipment that were broken and unsanitary. Just these four items alone represent violations of both City and Federal law. It would be quite easy to make a case against Village for recklessness and negligence, which I fully intend to do if necessary to get them to reimburse me for the towing charge. If this forces the theatre to close down, so be it. This theatre is a public nuisance and an eyesore and has been allowed to limp along for far too long. From what I am reading on this and many other websites, I am not alone in this opinion.
All:
I had the misfortune of going to the Village Theatre last night Dec 1 ‘07 and got caught in the parking fiasco which has been allowed to develop there by Village Entertainment. I have never been to this theatre before so and had to drive around the theatre/block several times to find a suitable parking lot. I settled on the one that had a connecting sidewalk that lead straight to the box office. I was unaware at the time that NONE of the parking lots adjacent to the building are meant to serve the theatre. The box office itself was closed, allegedly due to a lack of heat and the severe rain/snow storm taking place at the time. Consequently, if there was any signage posted at the box office to warn patrons where to park (or not), it was missed by anyone attending a movie that night. No other sign or verbal warning was given by the ticket-taker at the main door vestibule or the ticket sellers at the concession stand. During the movie my car was towed to a south chicago tow company lot. I don’t know how they (B & M towing; 1716 S. Western) identified my car with the theatre, but they towed it anyway. I am going back to Village today to get a refund of my movie ticket; and would like to do the same for the towing charges. I have already told my credit card company to deny the $125 towing charges, but hope instead to ultimately resolve this situation by getting a reimbursement from Village Entertainment. Judging from this website postings, I am doubtful a company like Village will offer to reimburse me; however they are clearly the ones at fault. Their “parking plan” is a sham…it is non-existent and it exposes their patrons to real and substantial threats (stranded, with family, and with no phone and no way to travel 20+ miles to south chicago to retrieve the car…in a severe snowstorm no less!!). Expecting patrons to 'know’ that they must park 2-3 blocks off-site on other’s unsupervised property (Home Depot or Thillens Stadium) where your car is equally subject to towing and more subject to vandalism is beyond absurd. Does anyone here have a suggestion on what to do or how to contact Village Entertainment? Has anyone else had this experience? Should I contact the alderman or the metropolitan water district for their support? The towing company has my address and license number – what are their rights when they find out their charge to my credit card has been denied?
BWChicago:
I and familiar with and agree with everything you’ve written above about the context, history, intent, criticism and corporate economics of early 20th-century theatre design and present-day big box movie theater design. I just didn’t want to make my comments unnecessarily long, and at the time I was only responding to others thoughts about the architectural merits of the building in absolute terms. One comment had made a comparison between this theatre and an ancient Mesopotamian temple and I was saying that such an intentional ‘hommage’ was probably not the designer’s intent here. It is true that LV’s original designer may have been trying to do a little more here to ‘decorate the box’, and in my comments I did consider the context of the era in which it was designed, which was late-80’s post-modernism. I did not get into all the detail which you have in your response, but I thank you that you did.
With any building project there will always be constraints and I have dealt with them all: flood plains, constricted sites, constricted budgets, unrealistic deadlines, unrealistic clients, urban infill contexts which demand all that all the attention be placed on the facade and not the side or rear walls, etc. The bigger question is how to judge the adequacy of LV’s response to it’s constraints in absolute terms as a piece of built form in the public realm. One might try to argue that ‘theatre’ architecture should somehow be exempt from this judgment, but why should theatres get this special consideration, particularly since they are visited far more often by the general public than other ‘public’ buildings (such as libraries, courthouses, hospitals, etc)? On the contrary, one might say that movie theatres have an even higher aesthetic/architectural responsibility precisely because they are so heavily patronized. In this day and age, people’s perception of what constitutes good design is more often than not based on what they see at the shopping mall. If one wants to influence public artistic perception, this is a prime building type where one can still do it.
I still maintain this building is an architectural eyesore; it is big, it is bulky (despite the stair & box office tower massing), it has no sense of detail or articulation, and it’s attempts at decorative expression are so stripped down so as to render them trite and banal. The sideways orientation of the building to the street is awkward and impedes any visual recognition of the building’s form(s) and the attempts the designers may have made at scaling this theatre down to size. I have lived in the area since before LV was built and I have had this opinion since the first time I saw it. My feelings have nothing to do with my particularly bad experience at this theatre, although that experience has certainly focused my attention on the merits of LV continuing to operate under the adverse conditions it faces. My point is, barring any change of attitude from the MWD there aren’t many compelling arguments (profitability, community patronage, architectural preservationism, civic or neighborhood presence) for this particular building to stay. Indeed, there have been far more worthy examples of architectural excellence in Chicago that have fallen to the wrecking ball. LV (or its operator) needs to go if we are to have any hope for the civic potential of this prominent corner to be realized. Until it does, MWD and LV will remain deadlocked, and this site will remain an unsightly no-man’s land of chainlink, aging asphalt, concrete barricades, shuttered businesses and neglected landscape.
Catherine:
No worries – we think alike. I’m all for small business. I’d rather patronize an old renovated or well-kept classic theatre than a banal new one. I think alot of people think like you and me; otherwise there would not be a website with such a fan base as this. The problem is – and I realize you see this – Village Theatres LLC is just cashing in on this sentiment. They have no intention of living up to their responsibilities as business operators or curators/caretakers of the public trust. There’s a phrase – I’m misquoting it but it goes something like “the flag is the last refuge of a scoundrel”. Definitely applicable here. If they feel otherwise; if they feel they are being misunderstood, (and Ron Rooding if you are reading this)….then prove otherwise with your actions.
All:
I appreciate your appreciation of ‘architecture’; and I guess LV 1-6 might appear more animated than some other multiplexes in Chicago – but then again holding multiplexes up as the standard-bearers for good architecture/design is perhaps a bit of a reach. It’s my business to know something about good architectural design – and this is not it. The Lincoln Village 1-6 was built at the trailing end of the architectural post-modern era, well after its first practitioners had abandoned the whole post-modern movement as bankrupt. Stylistically, LV may appear to be loosely quoting some form of stripped-down neo-classical motif but I am quite certain that the ‘ziggurat’ forms took no inspiration from Eqypt, Greece, Rome or Central America for that matter. More than likely those forms were someone’s uninspired attempt to disguise the large emergency exit stairs that are required for any ‘assembly’ space where alot of people may have to get out in a hurry. As the enclosed exit stairs from the upper theatres descend down the side of the building, so do the roof forms. Take away the exit stairs and you’re left with the same basic big multiplex box that you’ve got in all the other multiplexes.
I’ll quote a passage from the article cited by Redon above to sum this up:
“Almost by way of apology for the crime against cinema that Cineplex Odious committed, in 1985 they built the LV 1-6 at the other end of the parking lot. It was your typical CO monstrosity complete with a Good ‘n’ Plenty color scheme and abysmal focus.”
The old classic theaters – such as the ones that originally inspired this website – pursued their goals much more seriously and sucessfully. They hired real artisans to produce faithful (if somewhat fanciful) architectural period reproductions. They spared no expense, unlike LV 1-6 whose stripped-down architectural detail leaves everything to the imagination. LV’s time has come and gone – it has said all it had to say about architecture in the first week that it was open. Time for something more inspired to occupy this prominent site – this gateway to Lincolnwood and Rogers Park.
Redon:
You have been too kind in your review.
mp775:
You said it – as absurd as it may sound, parking at the unlit, unsecured and under-sized gravel parking lot at Thillens is now an official part of the Village Theatre’s business operations. They must think their customers are that dedicated (or insane) to walk through the mud and trees, cross busy Devon Ave, cross a canal bridge, and hike around (or over) fencing and barricades to visit their theatre. I guess you’re suggesting that the lot I parked in may have belonged to the shopping center, and that this may have been allowable up to a couple of weeks ago. Truthfully, I could not tell you who this lot actually belongs to – it is a no-man’s land adjoining the back of multiple businesses and was deserted at the time. I can’t believe anyone cares or depends upon it for their business…it probably operates much more effectively as a towing ‘trap’ profit center so that the related businesses can split the take with the towing companies. As I mentioned before I took pictures the next morning and will review them as to what the signs might have said the night I was there.
The Home Depot option is just as exiting for those inclined to risk…you can only park there until 9:30pm (and presumeably vulnerable to towing after that). Like Thillens, you have to leap over or walk a loooonnnngggg way around fencing barricades and cross 6 lanes of busy traffic on McCormick to get to the theatre.
The bottom line is that Village’s seat-of-the-pants business operations puts their customers at risk (can you imagine how fun it was to drag my family 25 miles down to 17th and Western at 11:00 pm in an icestorm?). I understand that Village is having the squeeze put on them by the MWD, but this parking fiasco (and the theatre’s building/accessibility code violations) have gone on for the better part of a year – if not longer. Ridiculous! No one in this City should knowingly operate this way….or be allowed to…
All:
Thanks for the advice, and the referral to the Village Arts page. I meant no offense by suggesting C worked for Village Entertainment. Based on this theater owner’s response(s) to Paul, I not sure just yet if he is a wanna-be-decent owner who is ‘fighting the fight’ on behalf of the small theatre venue in the face of his many recurring business challenges, or someone who simply is manipulating his ‘facts’ to make it appear that way. Google Rod Rooding and tell me what you think….he doesn’t have much going for him in the credibility department. Whatever the case may be, he still cannot be allowed to operate his businesses in a manner that jeopardizes his patron’s health, safety and property. I deal with these issues all the time in my line of work…if the City doesn’t hold him accountable then shame on all of us.
All:
Thanks for the comments. I’m taking it up with the Village Theatre, The Metropolitan Water District and Alderman Stone. Regarding Catherine DiM’s comments, you are right that the towing company was just doing their job. However, it is clear that Village is THE only party that CAN be held responsible, and your comments sound suspiciously sympathetic to the owner…do you work for Village Entertainment? With respect to the theatre, THEY advertise and solicit customers to attend to the movies and so it is completely incumbent upon them to provide for their customer’s health and security if the customer chooses to partake of their services. If Village Entertainment thinks they have NO responsibility to provide for this then they are flying in the face of numerous City and Fire department regulations and deserve to be shut down (as they have in a few other cities). As I mentioned in my previous post, the box office was closed on this night (due to lack of heat), their warning signs regarding parking were not clearly posted and were not visible because the doors had been propped open to let customers through to the concession stand where the tickets were being sold. The ticket attendant standing in the vestibule said nothing about parking regulations, and the same was true for the concession stand attendants. I went back the next day to inspect the warning signs (and took photographs) and I can assure you there are no warnings on the main marquee. The warning signs in the parking lot simply say that unauthorized persons will be towed, and who would not think that the only accessible parking lot immediately adjacent to the theatre that has a connecting sidewalk leading straight up to the box office was not intended to serve the theatre??? I am a first (and last) time visitor – if you were in this situation, what would you have suspected? Village Theatre has a long history of operating their properties in this manner; all you have to do is Google Ron Rooding and you will find a treasure trove of information of past legal action and negligence: bounced checks, operating a theatre without a working fire alarm, patrons being assaulted by theatre employees. Lincoln Village 1-6’s violations were clearly evident the night I was there: no working elevator (a fire and handicapped accessibility violation), emergency doors that had been disabled and locked from the inside (I personally observed this), fabric and carpet that was torn and unsanitary, concession facilities and equipment that were broken and unsanitary. Just these four items alone represent violations of both City and Federal law. It would be quite easy to make a case against Village for recklessness and negligence, which I fully intend to do if necessary to get them to reimburse me for the towing charge. If this forces the theatre to close down, so be it. This theatre is a public nuisance and an eyesore and has been allowed to limp along for far too long. From what I am reading on this and many other websites, I am not alone in this opinion.
All:
I had the misfortune of going to the Village Theatre last night Dec 1 ‘07 and got caught in the parking fiasco which has been allowed to develop there by Village Entertainment. I have never been to this theatre before so and had to drive around the theatre/block several times to find a suitable parking lot. I settled on the one that had a connecting sidewalk that lead straight to the box office. I was unaware at the time that NONE of the parking lots adjacent to the building are meant to serve the theatre. The box office itself was closed, allegedly due to a lack of heat and the severe rain/snow storm taking place at the time. Consequently, if there was any signage posted at the box office to warn patrons where to park (or not), it was missed by anyone attending a movie that night. No other sign or verbal warning was given by the ticket-taker at the main door vestibule or the ticket sellers at the concession stand. During the movie my car was towed to a south chicago tow company lot. I don’t know how they (B & M towing; 1716 S. Western) identified my car with the theatre, but they towed it anyway. I am going back to Village today to get a refund of my movie ticket; and would like to do the same for the towing charges. I have already told my credit card company to deny the $125 towing charges, but hope instead to ultimately resolve this situation by getting a reimbursement from Village Entertainment. Judging from this website postings, I am doubtful a company like Village will offer to reimburse me; however they are clearly the ones at fault. Their “parking plan” is a sham…it is non-existent and it exposes their patrons to real and substantial threats (stranded, with family, and with no phone and no way to travel 20+ miles to south chicago to retrieve the car…in a severe snowstorm no less!!). Expecting patrons to 'know’ that they must park 2-3 blocks off-site on other’s unsupervised property (Home Depot or Thillens Stadium) where your car is equally subject to towing and more subject to vandalism is beyond absurd. Does anyone here have a suggestion on what to do or how to contact Village Entertainment? Has anyone else had this experience? Should I contact the alderman or the metropolitan water district for their support? The towing company has my address and license number – what are their rights when they find out their charge to my credit card has been denied?