#26
Posted: 11/29/15 at 12:20pm
Mr Roxy said: "Times Square is Disneyland East"
Pretty sure Disney World is Disneyland East.
Raising The Palace Theatre 29 feet... — Page 2
#27
Posted: 11/29/15 at 3:21pm
Deena Jones said: "I did read it,Tobias... I am just sad that Times Square has changed SO much.
Yeah, it was so charming before, with all the hookers and homeless and strip clubs.
Updated On: 11/29/15 at 03:21 PM
#28
Posted: 11/29/15 at 3:24pm
Deena, are you a republican. It seems like you hate change. Even when it's good.
My father (AIDS)
My sister (AIDS)
My uncle and my cousin and her best friend (AIDS, AIDS, AIDS)
The gays and the straights
And the white and the spades
#29
Posted: 11/29/15 at 4:01pm
Since the Landmark Board has given permission to a landmarked theater to make room for retail shops and thus established a legal precedent (certainly breaking the spirit of Landmarking a theater in the first place), do you think we will see other Broadway Theaters lifted twenty nine feet so the owners may derive additional revenue?
I really thought this would be a no brainer and not pass the Board and then ...
#30
Posted: 11/29/15 at 4:23pm
Landmark protection is sometimes dubious. Here is one example. Another was Landmark designation of the RKO Keith's theater in Flushing Queens.It had been designated but since a corrupt public official saw a chance to make a buck , he made sure it only received a partial designation allowing designation of the lobby only. The auditorium was gutted and even the lobby was ripped apart. It has sat for almost 40 years rotting away.
Poster Emeritus
Updated On: 11/29/15 at 04:23 PM
#31
Posted: 11/29/15 at 4:26pm
A sad story indeed, Mr, Roxy. Thanks for sharing.
#33
Posted: 11/29/15 at 5:24pm
So, if Holla If Ya Hear Me said they were going to "Raise the roof" there, that show was actually prophetic after all?!
#34
Posted: 11/30/15 at 1:29am
That sucks, Roxy. That's kind of how I feel about the Liberty. For the most part the theater is still there, but it's just being used for stupid reasons. I mean, a diner? Really? C'mon. You could make way more money putting on Blackbird with Michelle Williams. Anyway, I hope they get that other theater on 42nd Street up and running. Who owns it? It's got to cost a pretty penny to just stay there vacant. Why not use it for concerts?
And the whole raising the Palace is quite an incredible feet. I'm curious to see how it all goes down. And I'm surprised they haven't built above the the theaters yet.
#35
Posted: 11/30/15 at 1:43am
RippedMan said: "And the whole raising the Palace is quite an incredible feet."
Just 29, although that is quite a feat.
#36
Posted: 11/30/15 at 3:50pm
To Ripped. Give them time re building above the theaters
At least the Liberty is still there and is not a wreck. I was involved in trying to get Landmark designation for the RKO (& another theater years before. I put a lot of time and effort into it. The theater is a wreck and beyond saving . I have seen a lot of old derelict theaters. This one is the worst. They should do a mercy killing and just demolish it.
With the Marriot renovation, this and the recently demolished Mayfair/Demille getting around Times Square will be an adventure to say the least.
Poster Emeritus
#37
Posted: 12/1/15 at 9:46am
This sounds f*cking awesome. It'll give the theatre a much needed larger lobby space. It will bring back all of the original ornamentations that have disappeared over time. What's not to like? Frankly, the current front is ugly. A 75 foot front/lobby sounds nice.
#38
Posted: 12/1/15 at 4:57pm
I hate the way the Palace looks currently. This could only be an improvement.
#39
Posted: 12/1/15 at 5:00pm
This is what it once looked like:
This is what it looks like now:
It can only get better.
#40
Posted: 12/1/15 at 6:09pm
The wrap around billboard on the old DeMille theater are now both gone.
Poster Emeritus
Updated On: 12/1/15 at 06:09 PM
#41
Posted: 12/1/15 at 9:53pm
He has some interesting points... http://nypost.com/2015/11/30/planned-changes-at-famed-nyc-theater-must-be-stopped/
#42
Posted: 12/1/15 at 10:09pm
Did not know that, Mr. Roxy...interesting.
#43
Posted: 12/1/15 at 10:30pm
I disagree with him about moving the entrance to 47th or saving the facade. The facade is so awful now that I care only about the interior. The exterior was lost long ago.
#44
Posted: 12/1/15 at 10:44pm
I highly doubt that every theatre is going to do this. It would be nearly impossible to do it for most theatres. Also I feel that article was pretty one sided. It didn't talk about the renovations they were going to do on the interior. It's like a win win. More money from retail and the theatre gets perfected.
My father (AIDS)
My sister (AIDS)
My uncle and my cousin and her best friend (AIDS, AIDS, AIDS)
The gays and the straights
And the white and the spades
#45
Posted: 12/1/15 at 10:52pm
Yes, the time warp effect of entering a vintage early 20th century playhouse by way of early 90s garishness is completely awful. The exterior is a bad joke. I've seen theatergoers standing at the southeast corner of 47th Street and Broadway, trying to figure out where the Palace is. The actual theatergoing experience is little better there, and the interior itself has needed refurbishment for 25 years. As the damage was done to the Palace when its original exterior was demolished and the theatre was swallowed up by the Doubletree, this latest plan is only the latest in the series of indignities the building has suffered. So what does it matter? Maybe with a new entrance on 47th Street instead, and improved access in and out of the building, it will be less horrible to see a show there.
Begin at the beginning and go on till you come to the end: then stop.
#46
Posted: 12/1/15 at 11:20pm
theatreguy said: "The additonal lobby space would definitely be nice. And the new restrooms are huge! If this doesn't happen, the Palace could still definitely use a renovation ASAP. It's been looking pretty sad in there for years now.
I agree 100%
Recently, I had the pleasure of seeing An American in Paris, and the lobby space was tight. Not to mention the ladies restroom was cramped as well. It's a beautiful theatre, but a refurb would do wonders.
#47
Posted: 12/1/15 at 11:30pm
You could say cramped about most of the older theaters.Unfortunately, they only have so much space to work with especially in the auditorium. Add to that, you are actually expecting the theater owners to use the facility fee for something other than lining their own pockets.
Poster Emeritus
Updated On: 12/1/15 at 11:30 PM
#48
Posted: 12/2/15 at 1:53am
Times Square is like a giant circus. With those Disney characters and topless girls. More tourists crowding the sidewalks. The Palace theater redo is the least of Broadway's problems.
#49
Posted: 12/2/15 at 2:01am
Call_me_jorge said: "I highly doubt that every theatre is going to do this. It would be nearly impossible to do it for most theatres. Also I feel that article was pretty one sided. It didn't talk about the renovations they were going to do on the interior. It's like a win win. More money from retail and the theatre gets perfected."
Specifically, the article didn't do much but curmudgeonly recount its storied history in a without addressing the horrible 80s remodel or the enhancements. If there was something worthwhile saving of the facade facing Broadway/7th it would be one thing, but there isn't - and that stretch of sidewalk is horribly crowded. Now, the'd really get me onboard if they would remove the last rows of seats that were added in the old gallery area to give more room in the auditorium.
Updated On: 12/2/15 at 02:01 AM
#50
Posted: 6/1/16 at 5:40pm
Bump
Any news or thoughts? When do you think AAIP will pack up?
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95