Palladium Times Square

1515 Broadway,
New York, NY 10036

Unfavorite 32 people favorited this theater

Showing 401 - 425 of 573 comments

dennisczimmerman
dennisczimmerman on May 29, 2004 at 7:55 pm

I have never been in the Astor Plaza, but based on the information here, this theatre “should be a keeper.” However, I want to make a correction to MikeRa statement on May 26th. “Star Wars” did play at the Eric’s Place Theatre in Philadelphia. However, that theatre did not present films in 70mm. It was too small. The screen area was between two exit doors. The theatre only had no more than 400 seats. It was the Trans-Lux originally before being taken over by Sameric Theatres. “Star Wars” moved from the Eric’s Place to the Eric’s Mark 1 a number of weeks after its opening. The Mark 1 was capable of showing 70mm, but the screen size still did not compare

to the Sameric/Boyd Theatre a few blocks away. Hence when the next two “Star Wars” films were released, they were both shown in “real good” 70mm on the real large screen of the Sameric/Boyd Theatre. Both the Eric’s Place and Mark 1 have long since been closed. The Sameric/Boyd Theatre, the last movie palace in center city, has been closed for two years now. But there is great support to restore and reopen this movie palace. I attended the “roashow” showings of “Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines” and “Ryans Daughter” at the TransLux (Eric’s Place) and on my first visit for “Flying Machines” was extremely disappointed on the screen size for a roadshow presentation.

dennisczimmerman
dennisczimmerman on May 29, 2004 at 7:55 pm

I have never been in the Astor Plaza, but based on the information here, this theatre “should be a keeper.” However, I want to make a correction to MikeRa statement on May 26th. “Star Wars” did play at the Eric’s Place Theatre in Philadelphia. However, that theatre did not present films in 70mm. It was too small. The screen area was between two exit doors. The theatre only had no more than 400 seats. It was the Trans-Lux originally before being taken over by Sameric Theatres. “Star Wars” moved from the Eric’s Place to the Eric’s Mark 1 a number of weeks after its opening. The Mark 1 was capable of showing 70mm, but the screen size still did not compare

to the Sameric/Boyd Theatre a few blocks away. Hence when the next two “Star Wars” films were released, they were both shown in “real good” 70mm on the real large screen of the Sameric/Boyd Theatre. Both the Eric’s Place and Mark 1 have long since been closed. The Sameric/Boyd Theatre, the last movie palace in center city, has been closed for two years now. But there is great support to restore and reopen this movie palace. I attended the “roashow” showings of “Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines” and “Ryans Daughter” at the TransLux (Eric’s Place) and on my first visit for “Flying Machines” was extremely disappointed on the screen size for a roadshow presentation.

Bill Huelbig
Bill Huelbig on May 28, 2004 at 11:57 am

William: I never thought of it that way. I just assumed that if they’re showing the movie at reserved seat prices, and exclusive to the area outside New York City, then they’d be showing it in 70mm just like the NYC theaters. I should never assume …

VincentParisi
VincentParisi on May 28, 2004 at 9:28 am

William were Oliver and Funny Girl presented at the State and the Criterion in NY in blow up 70mm? Neither was filmed in the process and neither were advertised in their original roadshow engagements as being in presented in 70mm. It seems odd that two major films at this time playing at 70mm houses were simply shown in Panavision. Maybe Columbia had a major budget crunch concerning prints. Interestingly these are probably the only two of the hardticket movies at this time that made money.

William
William on May 28, 2004 at 8:56 am

The studios only made a limited numberof 70MM prints, not like those numbers they do for todays film releases. The major markets would get the major 70MM Roadshow releases. Some of the smaller towns would or might get the feature in 35mm 4-Track Stereo. About 99 & 9/10th % of all those 70MM prints are gone with the wind. The studios would destroy the print instead of paying storage fees and the age of the prints too. The film exchanges would dismount the film and trash it and reuse the shipping cans and reels for later 70MM releases.
One problem about newspaper ads is they would state use the film’s format photography as a selling point. So “Exodus” was photographed in Panavision 70, but sometimes a newspaper ads would word it that way. And other ads would read “Presented in Panavision 70”, and that would be the correct way for presentation. One way show it was photographed in 70MM and the other shows how it was presented in 70MM. That one you have to look out for when doing research in film ad formats.

William
William on May 28, 2004 at 8:56 am

The studios only made a limited numberof 70MM prints, not like those numbers they do for todays film releases. The major markets would get the major 70MM Roadshow releases. Some of the smaller towns would or might get the feature in 35mm 4-Track Stereo. About 99 & 9/10th % of all those 70MM prints are gone with the wind. The studios would destroy the print instead of paying storage fees and the age of the prints too. The film exchanges would dismount the film and trash it and reuse the shipping cans and reels for later 70MM releases.
One problem about newspaper ads is they would state use the film’s format photography as a selling point. So “Exodus” was photographed in Panavision 70, but sometimes a newspaper ads would word it that way. And other ads would read “Presented in Panavision 70”, and that would be the correct way for presentation. One way show it was photographed in 70MM and the other shows how it was presented in 70MM. That one you have to look out for when doing research in film ad formats.

Bill Huelbig
Bill Huelbig on May 28, 2004 at 7:34 am

Vincent: Star Wars definitely played in 70mm in Paramus, NJ. This article has a link to a list of all the theaters that played the 70mm version:

View link

Also, the ‘60’s roadshows in Montclair were 70mm, based on newspaper ads from the time. I recall an ad for Exodus at the Millburn Theater which said Panavision 70. And the only one I actually saw myself, The Shoes of the Fisherman at the Bellevue, was 70mm for sure.

VincentParisi
VincentParisi on May 28, 2004 at 6:56 am

Guys you should read my post about the Astor Plaza I wrote under the Capitol in response to William’s description of December ‘68 in Times
Square. How ironic that you are all waxing nostalgic about this place. Well as they say one’s man’s junk is another man’s treasure!

As well I would love to know what played in 70mm and where. Did Star Wars play at the Stanley Warner in NJ in 70mm or do we think it did.
When the roadshows played the smaller towns like Montclair and Asbury Park were they 70 or 35? And what in the world happened to all those prints?

Mark Tufiftee
Mark Tufiftee on May 28, 2004 at 6:24 am

I was a big fan of the Loews Century Plaza Cinemas in Century City at the (former) ABC Entertainment Center, and had hoped to someday travel to New York to visit the Astor because this website said it was similar. Now that it seems the Astor is going to be closed in August (according to another post on this page), I guess the great era of Loews' old theatres has come to an end. Does anybody know of another great old theatre that ISN’T scheduled for demolition/closure?

umbaba
umbaba on May 28, 2004 at 5:45 am

Bill, great Star Wars article. It brings back memories as I remember knowing people who saw the film for the first time at a standard 35mm mono sound theater(in those days most were mono) and they either, didn’t see what was the big deal, fell asleep or hated it.
I remember the 3rd and 4th time I saw the film was at the Totowa Cinema 2 and the Willowbrook 3 (former grand theaters then cut up for multiplexing) and I was …well, quite bored. The next time was the 79 re-release and I saw it again in 70MM at the Paramus theater and I loved it. It just goes to show that the 70MM showings made the difference for seeing that movie and for our memories. I assume that’s one of the reasons there’s so many replies to the Astor Plaza.

umbaba
umbaba on May 28, 2004 at 5:27 am

Thanks Bill. Because of this site, I found it a while ago, I think it’s great. I wish they had more about 70MM presentations from NY and NJ. I’ve been researching myself and it’s amazing, all the 70MM showings there were. Thanks again.

Bill Huelbig
Bill Huelbig on May 27, 2004 at 4:55 am

Rhett: you may be aware of it already, but here is a website that you will definitely enjoy:

in70mm.com

and you’ll like this article for sure:

View link

umbaba
umbaba on May 27, 2004 at 3:56 am

Well. at least I’m not alone. I’m not the only one who watched Star Wars on the anniversary and remembered. In fact I watched the whole “original” version s of the trilogy. Most would say..“get a life”. But hey, it’s my life. Glad tthere are other members.

Yes, I’ve been researching lately too as to all the 70MM presentations that were shown and I’ve seen. It’s amazing , all the 70mm showings that were. Now, there aren’t any.

moviebluedog
moviebluedog on May 26, 2004 at 10:54 pm

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?

William
William on May 26, 2004 at 1:28 pm

As per the sign in the lobby of the Astor Plaza, it seats 1528 people.

VincentParisi
VincentParisi on May 26, 2004 at 11:05 am

Rhett- The 68' would be for Todd AO and other 70mm films but definitely 100' for Cinerama.
Does anybody know the measurements of the Astor Plaza and Ziegfeld’s screens?

Bill Huelbig
Bill Huelbig on May 26, 2004 at 9:44 am

Rhett: I also watched Star Wars on its anniversary last night and made believe I was back in the Astor Plaza. I remember every detail of that screening: the wild audience reaction to the jump to hyperspace, where the laughs came in, even the row I sat in. I also remember feeling that I had to see this movie again as soon as I could, and to tell everybody I knew how good it was. My second time was at the Stanley Warner in Paramus. I wound up seeing it in a theater 32 times, most of them at the Astor Plaza.

umbaba
umbaba on May 26, 2004 at 3:51 am

Vincent….well if you wanna get technical??? I saw it at Stanley Warner in Paramus, I was 16,at that time I was working at the Clifton theater where “THe Deep” was playing, Mom picked me up after work,we all stood in line in Paramus and when the opening scene occurred, the audience flipped, I remember thinking, I’ll never have an experience like this again (so for me, a masterpece). If it wasn’t filmed in 70MM, it didn’t matter to me, it was shown in 70MM and the it worked for me. Last night I watched the original version again and it brought back memories.

There were many 70MM flicks I’ve experienced and alot of them made a difference in the viewing. I mean I saw “Staying Alive” in 70MM, it was great. When I saw it again, I thought, “What were they thinking”!! “Far and Away” was shot in 70MM and not only did the film stink, but I was unimpressed by the 70MM…but, Vincent, I hear where you’re coming from and I agree with your wish for a 68ft. screen. To each his own I guess. I also suppose it’s not worth it to venture to the Astor to say goodbye since the quality seems to be slipping. Guess we’ll just keep our own experiences in
memory.

Michael R. Rambo Jr.
Michael R. Rambo Jr. on May 26, 2004 at 12:31 am

Star Wars Ep. IV played in a couple of other theatres with the 70mm prints, beside the Loews Astor Plaza. I remember it playing at The Eric’s Place Theatre in Philadelphia, PA on 70mm prints

William
William on May 25, 2004 at 8:20 am

I was in the Astor Plaza on Saturday to see “Shrek 2”. Loew’s has changed those 4 backlit posters as you go downstairs to Loew’s type ads and one of them dates back to last summer with the movie “The Core”. The auditorium was far less then ¼ full at the 5:55PM show. The presentation was just fair, print was damaged with afew scratches and splices. The film just opened three days before. It just shows you how Loew’s feels about this theatre, as long as they get their $10.25 admission.

VincentParisi
VincentParisi on May 25, 2004 at 5:49 am

Rhett-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.

Again, lets have a cinema with at least a 68 ft screen in NY so that we can see the real and even the ersatz.

umbaba
umbaba on May 25, 2004 at 4:07 am

I agree with a previous post about “80 Days”. That watching it on TV , it is a boring film. In fact I believe of all the BEST PICTURE winners, I consider it the most overrated and unworthy of a win, considering in 1956, there was Ten Commandments, King and I and Giant. But, I DO feel that if it was seen on the big screen, it might have a different impact. As we all know, there’s nothing like the experience of a big screen experience like the Astpr would offer. Guess we’ll just have to let this one go.

So, for ALL the Astor Plaza fans, this is a good anniversary day, and a little nostalgia…..27 years ago today, May 25, 1977, STAR WARS opened across the country and at the Astor. A 70MM masterpiece. So, Happy Anniversary to us all who share in a great big screen 6-track sound 70mm memory. Those were the days.

bruceanthony
bruceanthony on May 25, 2004 at 1:06 am

I just don’t think “Around The World in 80 DAyS” has held up very well through the years. Some films hold up well and some films don’t.It was a huge success when released and many a theatre were renovated such as the Mike Todd Theatre in Chicago which was also owned by Elizabeth Talylor for many years.I doubt very much it would be successful. At least it is being restored for its DVD release.“Van Helsing” will never be considered a classic. The years 1939,1940 produced some of the greatest films ever made.This is where art and commerce came together and the studio system was at its height. I know film buffs like movies for many different reasons and everyone has there personal favorites.It would be lovely if a great movie theatre showed classic films in the proper setting from all decades.brucec

Bill Huelbig
Bill Huelbig on May 24, 2004 at 6:43 pm

Rhett: It’s funny to think about people 40 years from now looking back fondly to Van Helsing. In 40 years they’ll probably still be talking about Gone With the Wind and Around the World in 80 Days. The really good stuff never gets forgotten.

umbaba
umbaba on May 24, 2004 at 4:10 am

We live in a world of home video and television with only a selected few venturing out to see movies that are on TV all the time.
That’s us. Whatever we may understand about the financial woes of restoring a classic film, doesn’t mean we have to like it, and obviously we don’t. But it’s people like all on this site that have a loud voice about keeping these films alive and shown the way they’re supposed to. Keep it up. I doubt 40 years from now that there’ll be a site like this debating about restoring Van Helsing to be seen again on the big screen!!