Boxoffice (Apr-Jun 1939)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

Jiam tked HI SNPl r r ] [ INC By Ansel M. Moore THIS article will deal with the comparative ease and inexpensiveness by which theatre modernization may be accomplished in this new era of practical planning, modern materials and improved methods of application. Since it is to be somewhat of a comparison of the past with the present in order to show what has been accomplished, we must have a basis for such a comparison. So let’s take the theatres of ten or fifteen years ago, which would put us directly into that “de luxe” period during which there were but two classes of theatres; namely, the huge “dream palace” with its vulgar display of grandiosity, and the dingy little dime-a-throw dump derisively called “grind house” or “shootin’ gallery.” Shortly before “sound” and for a time thereafter, there was “no sich animal” as a medium-class theatre. It was either the super deluxer with enormous seating capacity and stupendous stage shows or its antithesis the little store show, cheap and tawdry in its appointments and equipment provisions, struggling along with its silent pictures in swaddling simplicity — squalor, in some instances. In those days, House Appeal was considered as the divine right of the pretentious cinema palace and a claim of the privileged few. To them, it meant only awesome atmospheric decorations and shimmering doodads that did little more than lull the patron into believing that it was all a dream. To the more artistic tastes of that day, it was indeed a nightmare. Cost of Upkeep Was High The point is that it cost real money to promote and maintain those dream palaces of the pre-depression period. Some of the gilded mushrooms ran into the millions and most of it was spent not for comfort nor convenience, but for showiness and snide frippery by which it was thought to fool the dear public. But not for long. The owner of the small theatre in those days couldn’t very well emulate his more affluent colleagues in the matter of cornering the market on fine feathers. Had he really wanted to, he couldn’t have afforded the fancy prices that were then being paid for architectural gargoyles and gold-leaf wall coverings. The introduction of sound to the moving picture is what really put the small capacity theatre back in the running again, and to the talking picture may be credited the rise in popularity of the refined, highly functional, comfortably furnished community center cinemas which dot our A cozy corner in the lounge of the Lido Theatre, in Manley, Iowa. A decorative treatment of gay design accentuated with bright color harmony. A contrasting tile ceiling, with tan plank walls in random widths and a mahogany broum wainscot. Nu-Wood was the medium used. (Photo courtesy Wood Conversion Company .) suburbs and smaller towns today. When the silent picture slipped into oblivion and audible screen entertainment speedily took its place, it was found that huge, heavily ornamented auditoria were highly unsuited for sound reproduction. Structurally, they were an abomination to audible sound reception and the best of acoustical engineering talent was tripped up in trying to apply some relief. But for the small and simpler constructed theatres, minus the nooks and crannies, atmospheric domes and gingerbread garnishment, the adaptation to sound was no serious problem. Although acoustical treatment was a rather mysterious subject among showmen at the start, they soon found what a job it was to overcome the idiosyncracies of sound reception. However, the real trouble was that the crude applications of heterogenious sound correction materials of that period raised particular heck with decorative schemes. Gunny sacks, jute packing, smelly goat’s hair and other dirt collecting sound absorbents hurriedly tacked on walls and ceilings certainly didn’t improve decorative effects. Besides, the quickest and cheapest way to get some kind of result was the practice then almost unanimously The auditorium of the Sanborn Theatre, in Sanborn, Minn. This attractive interior was finished in ivory Nu-Wood board run horizontally and edged with Kolor-Trim. Insulation for temperature and sound control is provided for in this economical type of insulating interior finish. (Photo courtesy Wood Conversion Company.) The MODERN THEATRE SECTION