Great pictures of theaters from the stage? — Page 2

Here are are some photos from theaters around the country.

http://www.irwinseating.com/installations/PAC_installs.htm

So, SakeDad, can you figure out how to post some of these, even little tiny 3" x 2" versions?

[I hate those giant wide ones that make my scroll out to New Jersey just to see what everybody's lookin' at.]

What tours have you been in?

---

The picture of me is from way back in the beginning of SpamAlot's run. (Oy, I look like a fetus!)

---

Quite a few of our theatres are indeed less grand than the West End. But the bigger problem is that a number of the theatres - the Shubert houses in particular - got bland '60s era makeovers where some of the beautiful details and interiors were painted over in muted shades of oatmeal, mushroom and brown. Most of them are also too much in demand to be shut down for extended periods of time to get the full-on restoration that so many of them need.

Of the Shubert houses, the Shubert, Longacre, Winter Garden, Barrymore and Music Box had comparatively recent restorations and are in better shape than their counterparts. The Broadhurst, Schoenfeld, Jacobs and Golden are, I think, in decent condition and pretty much have most of their original detailing, if somewhat plain. I was surprised that the Imperial didn't get an interior makeover prior to Billy ... it looks a little dingy. The Majestic, I'm sure, will get a touch up if Phantom ever closes. The Lyceum is worn, but I still love its interior - new non-purple seats might help. The Belasco, Booth Ambassador and Cort need full-on renovations - all are shadows of themselves. The Broadway was ruined by that awful new facade and the interior is a bit erzatz - I think that some interior work on the boxes must be masked. It's too plain in there; plus, blood red and dusty rose mauve do not go together.

Of the Nederlander houses ... well, the Gershwin, Minskoff and Marquis are modern monstrosities. Awful inhospitable theatres all and a detriment to any show that plays within them. But they are in decent condition and I know that audiences find them comfortable. The Lunt was ruined in 1957 with a terrible chintzy kitschy renovation that removed the boxes and second balcony, but it looks the best it has ever looked right now. The Palace, like the Broadway, was also ruined by the demolition of its original facade and its dated, ridiculous '80s new facade, but I think the house looks nice. Brooks Atkinson is fine. The Nederlander is beautiful. The Neil Simon looked pretty run down the last time I was there, but it's a great house and just needs some TLC. The Richard Rodgers needs major help - charcoal grey and charred black surely could not have been the original interior colors.

The Jujamcyn theatres are in the best shape of the major theatre owners - Walter Kerr, Hirschfeld and O'Neill are beautiful and well kept. The August Wilson has always been a weird house, but that current interior is pretty close to the original, and makes up for the many years post-Carrie, when the theatre was all black. I don't love that sort of sponge paint mottled St. James interior, but it too looks better than it did in the 70s and 80s.

Of the others - the Friedman is a gem with terrific natural acoustics, and I think the American Airlines was nicely and attractively restored. The New Amsterdam is a triumph - a great theatre, saved from the brink of ruin and restored beyond my wildest dreams. The Hilton is a sad case - I am grateful that they didn't go for the bland interiors of the other new Broadway theatres and it has a lavish look to it, but it also seems a little sterile and it suffers from major sound problems. I've sat in the seventh row and felt far away from the action on stage. I'd love to see Studio 54 get a proper restoration, though I know that the partially ruined look of the interior works for some of the production there. That theatre looks like it was once very grand indeed and I love the long, spacious lobby. The Helen Hayes has had a couple of odd restoration attempts over the years and is in a sort of depths of hell shade of red phase right now, but I expect it will get a full-on restoration after 2010 whenever the 2nd Stage thing happens. Circle in the Square has a very '70s look to it, but it really is a unique place to see a show, and productions that have embraced its configuration instead of fighting it have fared extremely well. I wish it was used more often, even as a home for limited runs of the best of America's regionals, many of which share the same unique thrust stage shape.

And of course, I'm really keen to see the new Henry Miller's, and hope we'll see the Hellinger, Hudson, Times Square, Liberty and Hammerstein return to the fold someday, somehow.

---

Updated On: 3/14/09 at 11:07 AM

The Hellinger was built as a movie palace and like the other great movie theatres, it was meant to overwhelm in every sense, like the entertainment equivalent of going to a Catholic church. It's hard to understand for those of us who grew up going to the movies ushered like cattle into one of 24 completely identical cinder block cages.

So, the soaring lobby is grand in every way and the interior is a rococo riot. Parts of the ceiling were falling down when I was there for Grind, so the Times Square Church has kept it in far better condition than the Nederlander Organization ever did. But boy would it be nice to see a show in there again.

---