CinemaTour
Cinema History Around the World
 HOME ·· CINEMAS ·· FORUM ·· LINKS ·· BOOKS
 Contact Cinematour ·· Help & Hints ·· About Cinematour
Cinematour Forum


  
my profile | my password | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Cinematour Forum   » Cinemas and Theatres   » Regal LA Live Stadium 14 - Los Angeles, CA (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
Author Topic: Regal LA Live Stadium 14 - Los Angeles, CA
Chris Utley
Senior Member

Posts: 631
From: Torrance, CA
Registered: May 2003


 - posted October 20, 2009 02:03 PM      Profile for Chris Utley   Author's Homepage   Email Chris Utley         Edit/Delete Post 
T-Minus 7 days until this theatre opens. I probably won't visit until November 4th where I'll try to catch "This Is It" in it's much ballyhooed "Regal Premiere House."

Any predictions on how this theatre is gonna do? Anyone got the inside scoop on the building itself, it's architecture, floor plan, etc? Can anyone confirm whether the good folks at Regal are going to attempt to have more than 1 theatre with side masking?

Fire away!

 |  IP: Logged

Eric Gieszl
Member

Posts: 57
From: Las Vegas
Registered: Sep 2006


 - posted October 21, 2009 06:47 PM      Profile for Eric Gieszl   Email Eric Gieszl         Edit/Delete Post 
Why does side masking matter anymore if the scope screen goes wall-to-wall (full width)? Most of the newer theaters I've been to are designed where the screen is literally wall-to-wall for flat or scope presentations and therefore they have to use top masking.

The advantage to this set up is that you get a larger flat screen, while still having the maximum possible size scope screen for that auditorium.

There was a difference in the past, but in the recent designs I don't understand where you're coming from.

As for LA Live I think the theater is going to struggle. It's going to attract a crowd similar to The Bridge, which sucks unless you enjoy audience commentary throughout.

 |  IP: Logged

David Au
Member

Posts: 133
From: Walnut Creek, CA
Registered: Sep 2006


 - posted October 21, 2009 06:59 PM      Profile for David Au   Email David Au         Edit/Delete Post 
The problem with screens with top down masking is that screen brightness is usually optimized only for the scope configuration. If a flat movie (1.85) is shown, it will be dim and under-lit. The brightness of the picture suffers.

 |  IP: Logged

Christopher Crouch
Member

Posts: 292
From: Anaheim, CA
Registered: Feb 2006


 - posted October 22, 2009 01:40 AM      Profile for Christopher Crouch   Email Christopher Crouch         Edit/Delete Post 
I think the theatre will open with some decent numbers and possibly continue to do well with major releases. However, I don't see it maintaining "day to day" business.

 |  IP: Logged

Chris Utley
Senior Member

Posts: 631
From: Torrance, CA
Registered: May 2003


 - posted October 22, 2009 08:34 AM      Profile for Chris Utley   Author's Homepage   Email Chris Utley         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Why does side masking matter anymore if the scope screen goes wall-to-wall (full width)? Most of the newer theaters I've been to are designed where the screen is literally wall-to-wall for flat or scope presentations and therefore they have to use top masking.

The advantage to this set up is that you get a larger flat screen, while still having the maximum possible size scope screen for that auditorium.

There was a difference in the past, but in the recent designs I don't understand where you're coming from.

I'm spoiled, I guess. I just don't like attending movie theatres with screens the size of a postage stamp. And I certainly don't like theatres with screens that are massive for 1:85 films but shrink magically before your eyes for 2:35 widescreen films And, as we know, Regal is notorious for that. Oh yeah, they'll give you 1 or 2 houses with true widescreen aspect ratio, but the other 12 are of the postage stamp, incredible shrinking screen variety.

And please don't get me started on the new AMC's with top & bottom masking! I still like those better than Regal, though.

As I said, I'm spoiled. Blame it on too many years of National, Village, Grauman's Chinese, Cinerama Dome and (now) Arclight Hollywood. I know the average moviegoer probably couldn't care less about such things. But, as a proud old school movie geek who drools at the mention of the phrase 70MM, this stuff matters.

 |  IP: Logged

Eric Gieszl
Member

Posts: 57
From: Las Vegas
Registered: Sep 2006


 - posted October 22, 2009 09:57 PM      Profile for Eric Gieszl   Email Eric Gieszl         Edit/Delete Post 
David, I don't understand how brightness is a factor. In both cases the projector is the same distance from the screen.

Chris, I do understand what you're saying. I miss the days when showmanship was still a word in the exhibition industry. It was impressive when after three flat previews the screen would extend on both sides to reveal the wide screen for a scope presentation.

However, I think it was more of an issue in the past when the mall style shoebox cinemas were designed as narrow tubes. I think the recent AMC Theaters are actually ok.

 |  IP: Logged

David Au
Member

Posts: 133
From: Walnut Creek, CA
Registered: Sep 2006


 - posted October 23, 2009 01:11 AM      Profile for David Au   Email David Au         Edit/Delete Post 
The reason cinema chains adopted top-down masking is to save money. With right and left side masking, you need to vary lamp power and you need different lenses. With top-down masking they don't vary lamp power and they can use the same lenses. This saves on the cost of lenses, but at the cost of picture quality.

There are problems with screens with top-down masking. You have the same amount of light coming out of the projector, but the light is stretched across a wider surface area for flat movies(1.85) than scope movies. Essentially the light is diluted for flat movies. Flat movies are dimmer than scope movies on the same screen.

If we had screens with right and left side masking, both scope and flat movies will play with equal and optimal brightness on those screens.

 |  IP: Logged

Bill Gabel
Member

Posts: 288
From: New York, NY
Registered: Feb 2003


 - posted October 23, 2009 08:44 AM      Profile for Bill Gabel           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
you need to vary lamp power
[Rolling on Floor Laughing] you don't vary lamp power from flat to scope. You are using the same amount of power for both. It's all about how the xenon lamp is focused in the lamphouse to how much light hits the screen for each aspect ratio. That is what changes what the picture looks like. (bright/dim)

 |  IP: Logged

David Au
Member

Posts: 133
From: Walnut Creek, CA
Registered: Sep 2006


 - posted October 23, 2009 03:17 PM      Profile for David Au   Email David Au         Edit/Delete Post 
Oops. My mistake. I was just repeating what I read on another forum.

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Campbell
Member

Posts: 437
From: Seattle, WA
Registered: Oct 2004


 - posted October 24, 2009 09:18 AM      Profile for Mark Campbell   Email Mark Campbell         Edit/Delete Post 
My dislike of top-down masking is purely for emotional and nostalgic reasons. Scope films (2 Anamorphic 2.35 were meant to be something grander than the norm (flat 1.85). Thus the reason why the screen got larger (wider ) for scope films, The movie goer could ooh and aah over panoramic vistas but better yet be treated to much more interesting compositions within the frame, which could be just as advantageous to a courtroom drama as it was to a sprawling epic. That and the the certain attributes and artifacting that comes with filming with anamorphic lenses made scope presentations truly special to the movie goer.

These days exhibitors and film makers do not seem to care. Most "scope" films now are really super 35 croppings and not shot anamorphic at all (I applaud the new "Star Trek" for going old school anamorphic shot on film). The audience has been dumbed down into thinking that the 2.35 shape looks "cool" and so everything from feature films to music videos to viral videos to commercials are cropped to look that way without much in regard to composition or the true attributes of anamorphic photography.

Top down screen masking in merely icing on the cake in killing the lost art of widescreen cinema.

 |  IP: Logged

Chris Utley
Senior Member

Posts: 631
From: Torrance, CA
Registered: May 2003


 - posted October 26, 2009 08:41 AM      Profile for Chris Utley   Author's Homepage   Email Chris Utley         Edit/Delete Post 
Getting back on topic...

Does anyone know if the theatre is "done" as of now (10/26/09) or if they're rushing to put the finishing touches on the joint in time for it's 9:00 PST opening?

Meanwhile, there's an LA Times article about the theatre.

[ October 26, 2009, 09:05 AM: Message edited by: Chris Utley ]

 |  IP: Logged

Chris Utley
Senior Member

Posts: 631
From: Torrance, CA
Registered: May 2003


 - posted October 26, 2009 11:53 AM      Profile for Chris Utley   Author's Homepage   Email Chris Utley         Edit/Delete Post 
Variety also has an article about the theatre - and the state of the LA film exhibition scene as well.

Heh...the article also refers to the Village in Westwood as the Fox. [barf]

 |  IP: Logged

Chris Utley
Senior Member

Posts: 631
From: Torrance, CA
Registered: May 2003


 - posted October 27, 2009 10:31 AM      Profile for Chris Utley   Author's Homepage   Email Chris Utley         Edit/Delete Post 
And away we go...

================================================================
Regal Cinemas LA Live Opening Tuesday (posted at Blogdowntown.com):

Regal Cinemas at L.A. Live Opening Tuesday
By Eric Richardson

DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — It's hard to believe, but the opening of L.A. Live's 14-screen Regal Cinemas could be just the third-biggest event scheduled for the entertainment complex on Tuesday.

Three hours before the cinema makes its 9pm debut, Nokia Theatre hosts the world premiere for "Michael Jackson's This Is It," and just one hour after that the Lakers and Clippers open their seasons in a head-to-head showdown at Staples Center.

Over a longer term, though, the 3,772 seat theater complex is a pretty big deal.

On Monday evening, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Councilwoman Jan Perry joined officials from AEG and Regal Cinemas in a ribbon cutting for the complex. The venue will hold its first screenings on Tuesday, and we thought it was worth putting together a guide to what Downtowners should expect.

LOCATION: The theater is part of the L.A. Live complex, but is located behind the hotel tower. The main entrance is at Olympic and Georgia.

TICKET PRICES: $11 for regular adult tickets. $8.75 for matinee screenings. $8.50 for children and seniors. $10 for students. Toss in another $3.50 for 3D screenings.

Tickets can be purchased online through Regal partner Fandango or at the Box Office.

SPLIT LEVEL: Screens are split onto two floors, with a mezzanine between. Screens 2-7 are on the ground floor, with screens 8-14 up above. Screen 1, the 806-seat Regal Premiere House, sits off by itself and has entrances off of all three levels.

FIRST COME, FIRST SERVED: The Regal will not offer assigned seating, at least when it opens.

CONCESSIONS: It's your standard snack bar fare. The menu is a little confusing at first, until you realize each item includes its calorie count.

There's a large concession stand off the main three-story lobby, and a smaller one on the second floor near the high-numbered screens.

PARKING: You live Downtown and plan to walk, right? If not, there are two options for parking on-site. The lot across Olympic from the theater is labeled Cinema Parking, and offers 4 hours of validated parking for $5. That can be extended with a second validation from an L.A. Live restaurant. Validated parking is also available in the West Garage, but not the East Garage.

THIS IS IT: The theater is opening with wall-to-wall screenings of "Michael Jackson's This Is It." All 14 screens will show the film for the opening weekend, with showings starting every ten minutes much of the day on Wednesday.

The first non-MJ screenings aren't set yet.

HIGH-TECH: An emphasis was put on technology in the theater design. Digital projection throughout, and four screens support 3D projection.

PREMIERES: The Regal Premiere House, with 806 seats and a two-part curtain, aims to take premiere business away from Hollywood and Westwood. First up is the Sony sci-fi drama "2012" on Tuesday, November 3. Georgia street can be closed off for red carpets and limo drops, and the Premiere House is separated enough from the rest of the screens to allow other showings to continue.

DOWNTOWN NIGHT: Details are still sketchy, but the Regal will be holding an open house for Downtowners on Monday, November 2. Films will be free, though they won't be first-run.

================================================================

I must say, the outside sure looks pretty. And the view from inside the Premiere House ain't too shabby, either. CURTAINS!!!

 |  IP: Logged

Jeff Arellano
Senior Member

Posts: 685
From: Monterey Park, CA
Registered: Jun 2003


 - posted October 27, 2009 08:08 PM      Profile for Jeff Arellano   Email Jeff Arellano         Edit/Delete Post 
Curbed LA has some great pictures:

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2009/10/downtowns_regal_cinemas_opens_its_doors.php#more

 |  IP: Logged

David Au
Member

Posts: 133
From: Walnut Creek, CA
Registered: Sep 2006


 - posted October 27, 2009 11:04 PM      Profile for David Au   Email David Au         Edit/Delete Post 
The theater looks upscale and fancy for a Regal Cinema. It has sort of an art deco look. I do like that they have a curtain and a balcony in the premiere house.

I also noticed that the ticket prices seem to be cheaper than those of nearby theaters such as AMC or the Arclight. Perhaps they are trying to lure customers by a slightly cheaper price.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

© 1995-2013 Vision Entertainment Services. All rights reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2