Marc Ecko dumps its hold on Times Square Theater

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 2/17/09 at 8:02pm

After all these years of that eyesore on 42nd Street...

Marc Ecko Enterprises faces a nasty legal battle for walking away from its lease at the former Times Square Theater, where it abruptly dropped plans to open a spectacular, three-level flagship store.

Ecko was paying rent on the 217 W. 42nd Street site for 4½ years, but never got past the planning stage. The stall has left the theater's colonnaded façade covered with a 100-foot-long, plywood wall - an eyesore amid the gaily lit theaters, live-music venues and other attractions on the "Deuce" between Seventh and Eighth avenues.

The site's landlord, the nonprofit New 42nd Street, is "pursuing legal ends" against the sportswear giant, organization President Cora Cahan said. New 42nd Street oversees reuses of historic theaters on the block.
THIS 'ECKO' SOUNDS LIKE A LAWSUIT

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 2/17/09 at 8:09pm

Not too much of a shock - especially in this economy.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 1:22am

Do you think any of the theater organizations will attempt to buy it? or buy it back?

[TheaterBoy7777]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 3:09am

This is wonderful news! I just was killing me to see a Broadway theater turned into a store...lets hope someone picks it up and restores it.

[TheaterBoy7777]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 4:07am

Just for fun I thought I would throw these on the thread...

[Smaxie]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 5:35am

Supposedly it cannot be restored to theatrical use because all entrances and exits to the theatre are on 42nd Street, including load-in, so it poses too much of a problem to traffic. Sounds like a lousy reason, but that's what I think has prevented it from becoming a legit house again. At one time, the stage was also occupied by a retail store, but I don't think that is still a problem. Its interior, though worn, is largely intact, including, as you can see from the picture above, the boxes. It's a single balcony house, with about 1,000-1,100 seating capacity. Shame that New 42nd Street has considered it better served sitting for 5 years for a Marc Ecko store that never happened than by housing shows all of this time...

[winston89]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 9:08am

Smaxie, I agree that the reason as to why they can't restore the Times Square Theatre and use it to house shows does sound like a lousy one. However, it wouldn't shock me if The New 42nd Street Project says that that is the reason why they won't use it as a Broadway house.

However, my one problem with this is that The Times Square Theatre is not the only Broadway theatre that has all of its doors, including those for loading in sets on the same street. If they were to use it as a Broadway house again, I would have trouble seeing how that theatre's situation would be unique compared to the other theatres that have the same situation when it comes to loading in and loading out of sets.

[Weez]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 9:13am

Being a frequent visitor to some of the UK's more (and a handful of its lesser XD) attractive theatres, I've never really thought about any Broadway theatres as being especially attractive. But that's a very pretty theatre. I do hope it can be restored to its proper use before too very long.

[Rotel1026]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 9:54am

The restriction of no load in/out on 42nd Street isn't affecting theaters that aren't on 42nd Street. So while there are other theaters that only have doors facing one street, you can't really compare their situation to the Times Square Theater.

[Eris0303]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 10:00am

There's a huge difference between a theatre with all its doors on 42nd St vs one on, say, 47th. Much more traffic on 42nd.

edit...Rotel beat me to the punch

Updated On: 2/18/09 at 10:00 AM

[TheActr97J]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 11:18am

If they were to use it as a Broadway house again, I would have trouble seeing how that theatre's situation would be unique compared to the other theatres that have the same situation when it comes to loading in and loading out of sets.

Because it is one of the rules of the New 42nd Street Group. It's very silly but it's unfortunately just the way it is. Meanwhile, the Liberty Theater has its stage load-in door in the back on 41st Street and yet it also sits empty. Now if only somebody could figure out how to build it an entrance and a lobby. Anyone? Anyone?

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 11:24am

Seems like a stupid reason. I think they'd see great returns considering it's awesome location.

[HITcards]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 1:32pm

I recently toured the Liberty Theatre which is across the street and also in various states of disrepair. Apparently New 42 has been trying to get someone to pick it up to turn it into a store or restaurant or whatever. The problem with turning it back into a theatre and what I could guess the problem with the Times Square Theatre is that the fire exits and stairwells to the balcony have been completely closed up and used for the neighboring stores. In the case of the Liberty, where the fire exit once was is now Ripley's Believe It or Not, and the stairwells to the balcony are now closed off and part of Applebees. Additionally, they closed off part of the fly gallery for the Times Square Hilton. It's still a beautiful building and quite awe striking when you go in, but it could never be returned to legit theatre use.

[Enjolras77]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 1:52pm

Here are some historic images of the Times Square Theatre, which I think contrast nicely with the more recent ones posted by TheaterBoy7777:





http://www.ibdb.com/venueimages.php?id=1365

[TheActr97J]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 4:33pm

Where in any of those photos does is the 42nd Street loading dock for the Times Square? I'm not seeing it. Are we sure that it is on the 42nd Street side?

[Justin D]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 5:43pm

I still think it is a stupid reason, point blank. How long does it take to load in a set these days, and isnt 42nd st. a 4 lane street?

I just think it is lame and they probably feel the land will make more $$$ as something other than a theatre.

[Neverandy]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 5:53pm

It's surprising that traffic would stand in the way of this theatre re-opening. Construction projects shut down main thoroughfares all the time in NYC.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 2/18/09 at 6:52pm

They could always do what MTC did with the Friedman and just gut it and remodel the inside. I know it'd take some serious change, but no doubt it'd be worth it in the long run. Another mid-size theater on 42nd street will be a prime spot for new shows.

So when you're walking down 43rd street, and the part right next to the Hilton overhang/marquee, that's all part of the Times Square Theater? I have yet to understand the lay-out of the Hilton. I mean, it's so huge, but I don't understand where it fits on that block. The entrance to the theater is this long hallway, then this huge open breezeway with the staircases to the balconies. I'd love to see an aerial view of the 42nd street area just to understand the layout.

How big is the New Victory Theater? It's such a pretty building.

[winston89]

Posted: 2/19/09 at 2:02am

Keep in mind, that another reason why their reason seems like a bad one is this. If the theatre became an Ecko store, then they were going to have to block traffic for a bit to get clothing on and off the delivery truck. The street was going to be blocked for a little bit anyways, why would it matter if it got blocked to load in some clothing or to load in a Broadway set?

[Justin D]

Posted: 2/19/09 at 8:11am

Man I wish my scanner was working, I have 2 books that have the layout of the hilton and how they combined the 2 theatres.

Basically the holton on 43rd is 2 theatres combined. The 43rd street facade is the original facade of one of them. That same theatre had an entrance on 42nd street (which is the hilton's 42nd street entrance) the other theatre also had a 42nd street entrance (which is still there but i am not sure if it is used)

basically the times sq. theatre is sandwitched between these 2 entrances. personally i think they could use the other 42nd street entrance and make a larger lobby for the times theatre.

as for the little overhand on 43rd, thats an alley for the stage house of the victory theatre (their stage house is totally sandwitched behind buildings so that's the only access)

I still wonder if combining 2 theatres into one monstrous house was really a good idea.

[PiraguaGuy2]

Posted: 2/19/09 at 8:13am

Yet another smash hit from Winston.

Clothes are a bit easier to load in than Broadway sets, dear.

[Justin D]

Posted: 2/19/09 at 8:43am

Hope this makes more sence.

[TheActr97J]

Posted: 2/19/09 at 11:23am

Dammit Justin! I just did the same thing... only yours is better.

Oh well. Haha!

[UglyBetty]

Posted: 2/19/09 at 11:42am

All of this is so amazing intriguing to me, its like treasure hunting through time.

[Actor 7]

Posted: 2/19/09 at 1:11pm

I still think a complete revamping would make it possible to re-open the Times Square Theatre. Broadway needs these smaller houses for shows like Title of Show, and for plays. I would love to see some COLOR photos of how the interior and exterior of The LIBERTY THEATRE looks today. I do know The Liberty was last used for a play, T.S. Eliot's The Waste Land in 1996, and at that time, the seating capacity was 1,054.