Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Future of Ziegfeld Theater in NYC Questioned

This is topic Future of Ziegfeld Theater in NYC Questioned in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=006708

Posted by Jeff Taylor (Member # 443) on 07-08-2012, 02:35 PM:

It was in the NY Post today that Cablevision, which owns Clearview, would like out of the theater business, and specifically the Ziegfeld, which is one of NY's last premier showcases. Supposedly, the theater has been dark several nights recently. It is known to be losing at least $1 million annually, and with only 12 years left on the lease might be a tough takeover, even though Disney was mentioned in the article. Despite Clearview's shortcomings the Ziegfeld has been known for quality presentations.

Posted by Jeff Taylor (Member # 443) on 07-09-2012, 02:16 PM:

Today's paper indicates that Clearview has gotten a lot of push back and won't be closing the Zeigfeld "right now". Doesn't sound very permanent!

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-09-2012, 03:37 PM:

I guess Cablevision can't think outside of the box in terms of the publicity value the Ziegfeld might give to the rest of the Clearview Cinemas chain. If anything, I'd probably shut down some of the other more dumpy Clearview Cinemas locations and put more into making the Ziegfeld a tourist attraction, kind of like how some of the movie theaters in Hollywood are treated.

If I was running a movie theater chain I'd kind of like it if I had a world premiere class movie palace as a crown jewel of the theater circuit even if it was losing money by itself. The "halo effect" of that theater might spread to other locations.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 07-09-2012, 03:39 PM:

Yes, the Ziegfeld Theatre is a Nice place to see a film. But it's still a 1131 seat single screen barn. The only way to make it work is to build a ARClight plex around it, like Pacific Theatres did for the Cinerama Dome.

Posted by Jeff Taylor (Member # 443) on 07-09-2012, 04:03 PM:

The initial article indicated the City wanted to see another hotel on the site, fwiw. Of course there's no law that a hotel couldn't have a theater like the Marriott does.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 07-10-2012, 09:26 AM:

With real estate value in Manhattan at some upteen trillion dollars per square inch, it is not likely that the owners of the property won't be itching to sell or put up something that will make them a lot more money than the lease brings in from a theatre, as well-known as it is, but that is dark more than it is open. And of course we all KNOW how much money there is in running a single screen -- which is why there are so many of them!

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-10-2012, 11:51 AM:

For over 20 years I've wondered why movie theater chains didn't build multiplex sites to combine the best of both worlds: multiplex variety of choice and a separate palace building on the site that served as a premiere class style showplace.

Some newer theaters have kinda sorta done this lately. The Warren Moore 14 here in Oklahoma has two lavish, balcony equipped auditoriums that look really nice and have really huge screens (perhaps too huge for the 2K digital projection in place). But they share a common lobby, snack bar, etc. basically making them no different than other multplex screens from a fundamental perspective. The common lobby/snack bar design really sucks for private, world premiere style party/events.

Movie theater multiplex sites are, arguably, designed similar to the obsolete indoor shopping mall format. Many new shopping centers have adopted the "lifestyle center" approach where many stores have outdoor store fronts, landscaped avenues, etc. Some even feature mixed use buildings with shops at ground level and apartments above.

A movie theater multiplex could adopt a similar design and create a sort of theater district that makes the site seem more like a collection of separate movie theaters of varying size rather than just packing everything under one roof. Such an approach would be significantly more expensive in terms of decoration, signs, etc. But it would be a hell of a lot more cool than the typical blocky buildings that cram 18-24 screens under the roof in an unremarkable manner.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 07-10-2012, 01:38 PM:

Bobby - the Jordan Commons plex in Utah has exactly that kind of concept. It looks like a downtown area with different marquees leading to small groups of auditoriums. It's cool.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 07-10-2012, 06:41 PM:

quote:
The initial article indicated the City wanted to see another hotel on the site,

They want to make money on the Hotel Room Occupancy tax and the City Sales tax , if a hotel is built there.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 07-10-2012, 11:57 PM:

When we (Save the Kings org) were begging the city to preserve the stunning Loew's Kings 4000 seat "Wonder Theatre" movie palace on Flatbush Ave in Brooklyn, we proposed something very similar to Bobby's idea.

The Loew's Kings is one of the most lavish of all the Loew's ornate palace theatres designed by Rapp and Rapp, but which Marcus Loew assigned to his wife to put her own personal input on the interior design, hence the murals. The Kings building is so big you could put at least four other screens in it without out even touching the main theatre. It has a full sized basketball court in the basement (they held trourney games between rival theatre teams) where at least three, possibly four theatres could be installed or three and a food court.

Additionally there is a private screening room that the execs used to screen prints which is a ready-made theatre #5. The huge lobby could accomodate mall-style open air shops, plus the theatre property includes three store fronts on either side of it which could also be incorporate into the complex. This COULD be a viable, operating complex and still preserve the historical uniqueness of the palace elements.

Twenty years later the politicians are STILL dicking around trying to find investors, but every proposal which showed promise eventually gets nixed because, I'm sure, the politicians keep waiting to see what deal will garner them the biggest kickbacks. So the beautiful old lady sit, vacant and decaying.

Pictures taken by a Notre Dame photographer and good friend Bill Frederking, now chair of the Media Dept at Columbia College in Chicago. This is how the theatre looked in the mid 80s -- in perfect operational condition although it was closed. Those designs on the curtain which can't be clearly seen are pelicans done in silver and pink sequens against a night blue velour. All the lighting seen here is all indiginious. Bill used no additional lights or flash. These were taken with large format camera and extended time exposures, some for as long as 15 minutes.

All the city needed to do was MINIMAL maintenance -- heat it during the winter, secure it from vandals. The city pig officials did neither; it's criminal.

Balcony shot. This is the only one of the Lowe's Wonder Theatres that are adorned by four two-story, hand-painted stately murals, two on either side wall, one of Mrs. Loew's personal touches. The murals are gone due to the plaster freezing winter after winter. Notice the surround speaker box, speaker gone to vandals.

And here she is today.

Look upon her and weep.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 07-11-2012, 08:48 AM:

Frank, On Feb. 2, 2010, the City of New York announced a $70 million dollar renovation in partnership with ACE Theatrical Group of Houston to restore the Kings Theatre for use as a performing arts center by 2014.

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 07-11-2012, 12:08 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
I guess Cablevision can't think outside of the box in terms of the publicity value the Ziegfeld might give to the rest of the Clearview Cinemas chain. If anything, I'd probably shut down some of the other more dumpy Clearview Cinemas locations and put more into making the Ziegfeld a tourist attraction, kind of like how some of the movie theaters in Hollywood are treated.

Problem is, the Ziegfeld doesn't share anything in common with the four remaining operating movie theatres in Hollywood.

It's not part of the Grauman's legacy.
It doesn't sit on a major street thoroughfare.
It isn't owned by a major movie distributor, who uses it as a flagship theatre for their own movies.
It doesn't have footprints in the courtyard.
It doesn't have an ornately designed exterior and/or marquee.

What the Ziegfeld needs is a tectonic shift in distribution plans, back to exclusive engagements before a national rollout, like they had with Moulin Rouge and Dreamgirls, or limited releases, like they had with Chicago. I was at the Ziegfeld on opening day of Chicago, first matinee show, and that place was packed to the gills. All shows sold out for days. I think they did $200k in box office that first week, if I recall correctly.

My question is, what kind of crappy lease did Clearview sign that causes them to lose $20k per week on the venue?

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-11-2012, 01:22 PM:

I didn't know the Ziegfeld wasn't getting any exclusives. I guess that must be a failing on the part of Clearview Cinemas management.

When I lived in New York City (from 1986 to 1991) the Ziegfeld was pretty much the only theater on the East Coast that hosted world premieres of major Hollywood films. They also had plenty of exclusive movie engagements. I watched films such as Born on the Fourth of July, Spartacus and Edward Scissorhands at the Ziegfeld when they couldn't be seen anywhere else. Those films and many others not mentioned were projected in 70mm too.

With 70mm all but gone and media companies approaching the movie business like fast food franchising the whole idea of showmanship is getting thrown out the window. I guess the suits want to make it all the same, and every bit as bland, from one location to next. Movie magic? Showmanship? Those things only compute as a waste of money to the average MBA degree wielding bean counter.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 07-11-2012, 02:01 PM:

quote: Bill Gabel
Frank, On Feb. 2, 2010, the City of New York announced a $70 million dollar renovation in partnership with ACE Theatrical Group of Houston to restore the Kings Theatre for use as a performing arts center by 2014.

Yes, and over the years the city has announced quite a number of other renovation projects that lauched with fanfare but then sputtered out. And yes, this one does sound promising, but the thing is, this outfit out of Texas (how well acquainted with Brooklyn and the neighborhood they will need to serve?) supposedly was to put down 5 million and the city would kick in $65. When that was announced, many asked...and then ACE gets to OWN the theatre? Or if they decide it is not viable after a few years, they walk away and the city is holding the bag? Not a lot was explained about the deal.

Anyway, I live two blocks away from the Kings and haven't see any sign of work being down....in two years. I find it very questionable that a company would invest money and then not move immediately to get it started. Every day you are not building, you are loosing money; cost for goods and labor go up, never down. Yet there it stands, still in what seems like limbo.

The other things that make this seem so out in left field as a viable project is, do they really think a performing arts center will be successful when the theatre is a quarter of a mile from Brooklyn Center for the Performing Arts south on the same Flatbush Avenue and when just a bit farther north (again on the same Flatbush Avenue) there is the Brooklyn Academy Of Music and their renovation of the Strand Theatre, not to mention the soon-to-open, huge Barclay Arena -- ON THE SAME AVENUE!?

The Kings is between the gentrification that is taking place north of it with the Marriott and the yuppies taking over the brownstones around the DeKalb area, while south of it around Brooklyn College, there's been a up-tick in renewal which started with the Target Triangle Mall on, can we say it again -- Flatbush Avenue. Neighborhoods here are prospering plus our Center's new Tow Performing Arts wing a block away is already under construction as we speak and set to open in 2014.

Yet the area around the Kings has not been part of any of the renewal; crime is still high. The theatre has no parking lot and only metered street parking; the subway is not what most would consider a comfortable walking distance from the theatre and even if one were robust enough for the walk, you wouldn't want to walk in the area at night. Now that may change, but surely not in time for this ACE refurbishment to be completed.

Another question -- is it reasonable to think it can flourish in the midst of such a heavy concentration of other well established performing arts venues? Our marketing guys know the demographics here all to well and I can tell you, there is a finite population in this corridor who are looking for classical performing arts fare. We have to do a lot of programming diversification and fight like dogs to pull everyone of those highly prized art lovers in to our seats. Yet another venue vying for the same people?

Unfortunately, as much as I would love to see the Kings brought back to its former glory, I know all too well all the negatives that have stop every other proposal and attempts to make it work, some even as businesses other than a theatre which might have been more profitable with a better chance at success. In the end, none got past the proposal stages once all those very real negatives were taken into account.

If this company is indeed going to move ahead with the project, my question is, what are they waiting for?

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-11-2012, 04:27 PM:

I would love to see classic movie palaces like the Loews Kings be restored. But, yes, such efforts must be properly budgeted and executed promptly to keep the project from turning into a money pit. Too often when city governments get involved with efforts like this the extra levels of bureaucracy, public hearings, etc. drag a project time line that should be measured in months out to numerous years. Costly years.

For example, our new city hall here in Lawton is actually in the original, historic Lawton High School building. The building was falling apart and the many locals wanted it saved. The building was no longer suitable for school use because it would have been cost prohibitive to bring it up to code as part of the renovation process. So it was decided the city government would move into the building.

After a decade the building renovation work is still in various stages of completion and has cost millions of dollars more than originally budgeted. The silly piecemeal approaches used in funding projects like this, along with all the stupid red tape, guarantee efforts like this consume a lot more money and time than necessary.

Lots of old buildings are doomed because of factors ranging from the cost of asbestos removal to complying with Americans for Disabilities Act codes. Too often it's just a lot cheaper to tear down a historic building and erect something brand new than it is to renovate and restore.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 07-11-2012, 04:28 PM:

Frank, I was stating the last fact about what the city posted about a deal with ACE Group. If it goes through or not the problem is. How many days will it be dark a year. Alot of talk has been said on they need a performing arts center. The theatre needs to be brought up to code and Americans with disabilities act codes too. And they need management to run and not steal the money. (Paradise Theatre issue).
The Ziegfeld Theatre needs an ARClight plan of operation. Build a plex above the old theatre. It sounds like a old Cineplex type of lease. The old Cineplex Odeon Theatre in Westwood had a no profit style lease. They out bid many of the area chains when UA left the theatre.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 07-17-2012, 09:46 AM:

Yes, Bill, the Ziegfeld needs ArcLight style programming and you and me to run it!!

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 07-18-2012, 08:23 AM:

Frank, Now there's a Great plan. [thumbsup]