The Continental Is Gone

[writerranger]

As of around 7:00pm tonight (10-11-06) The Continental Theater is no more. All that's left standing is the back half - just a shell. I told the story in another thread of popping popcorn there as one of my first jobs. I popped it upstairs and took it downstairs to the big oval concession stand. I later worked concessions. Great job, fun people and a great theater. More memories are gone.

-----

[John]

They paved paradise and (literally) put up a parking lot.

Hope everyone is happy!

[Doug Loudenback]

As of around 7:00pm tonight (10-11-06) The Continental Theater is no more. All that's left standing is the back half - just a shell. I told the story in another thread of popping popcorn there as one of my first jobs. I popped it upstairs and took it downstairs to the big oval concession stand. I later worked concessions. Great job, fun people and a great theater. More memories are gone.
-----

Not quite right, writerranger ... your memories are not gone, just the property itself. As for the property, all of the downtown movie theaters have taken this trail for quite a long time (all destroyed in the 70s or so).

Sad for the personal and historical loss to you personally, though.

[Pete]

Sad day for OKC...

Sure wish they would have found a way to save it.

[ChristianConservative]

Oh, come on guys. The Continental may have been a nice place to see movies back in the day, but it had no architectural significance. It was only a black and white box. It was no Skirvin or Colcord, or even a Belle Isle Power plant. No big loss.

[Midtowner]

I agree with the above poster. The Continental was beyond its use. I hope they make good use of the land now that the place is gone.

[BDP]

all of the downtown movie theaters have taken this trail for quite a long time (all destroyed in the 70s or so).

What about the Nobel?

The worst part about this is that Oklahoma City now has no chance of having a classic venue that size like most cities of our size. It's really Oklahoma City's fault, though, use it or lose it, and we're not exactly a mecca for entertainment unless it's mass market stuff. Most promoters say it's that we don't have enough workable venues of The Continental's size, but it's probably just the culture itself.

At least now there'll be more parking there and/or office space there! We're strapped for that.

And The Continental was a theatrical gem. One of the last of its size and one of the last with curved screen technology. The front and the lobby were great, too. I can't think of many buildings in OKC that represent entertianment of that era, either. It's like we never existed then.

[ChristianConservative]

What about the Nobel?

The worst part about this is that Oklahoma City now has no chance of having a classic venue that size like most cities of our size. It's really Oklahoma City's fault, though, use it or lose it, and we're not exactly a mecca for entertainment unless it's mass market stuff. Most promoters say it's that we don't have enough workable venues of The Continental's size, but it's probably just the culture itself.

I honestly, for the life of me, couldn't ever picture The Continental ever being a mecca for the entertainment industry, regardless of how many improvements you made to the structure. Am I missing something here? I would've argued the other way in reference to the Criterion Theatre, but come on; this was The Continental.

Are we going to whine when they decide to demolish Windsor Hills Cinema here in a few years, after it has sat vacant for a few years?

Just because a building is 50+ years old doesn't make it worth saving.

[writerranger]

Not quite right, writerranger ... your memories are not gone, just the property itself. As for the property, all of the downtown movie theaters have taken this trail for quite a long time (all destroyed in the 70s or so).

Sad for the personal and historical loss to you personally, though.

Quite right, Doug. Remembering the downtown theaters going down one by one was sad, but for some reason (first job and all), this one is just sad on a personal level.

At this point arguing over the fate of the building is pointless - that's been decided - and it's gone.

------

[BDP]

I honestly, for the life of me, couldn't ever picture The Continental ever being a mecca for the entertainment industry

Really?? What other venue of that size do we have? Have you ever been to the Palladium in LA, the Warfield in San Francisco, the Fillmore? These are all great venues converted from ballrooms or old theaters that are in constant use. We basically have the Coca-Cola Event Center and the Farmer's Market. both of good size, but hardly ideal as venues. Cities all over the country have theaters like the Continental that do very well as entertainment venues.

It's age may not make it worth saving, but the lack of facilities like it in OKC certainly would have warranted it. But I understand that Oklahoma City can not offer the ROI for these places, because the demographics doesn't warrant it. It's just a hard reminder of what the bigger picture of Oklahoma City really is.

[BDP]

At this point arguing over the fate of the building is pointless - that's been decided - and it's gone.

This is true, especially considering it was pretty much the last one for OKC. You'd hope we'd learn our lesson about how more successful adaptive reuse is and how much more beneficial it is to the community rather than destruction for further saturation of services.

[ChristianConservative]

Being that the Continental was only a black and white box, it wasn't any more special architecturally-speaking than a Walgreens building. If the Criterion was still around I could see fighting to save it, but if the Continental is all we had to work with, building a new venue from ground up with some modern architecture would be a better option, in my opinion.

Venues like the Will Rogers theater, Tower Theater, Sooner Theater, or even the May Theater, are more eye-appealing than the Continental was, if you want to go with an older theater building.

[Pete]

but it had no architectural significance

Actually, Founders Tower, the Continental, the former Physician's Tower (now a hotel) and the former Community Bank building were all part of a cohesive development built in the 60's that was very signficant.

And this "we can't save everything" argument is lame. Scores of buildings are torn down in OKC without any sort of protest.

But there are some that are truly unique and worth saving and the Continental was one of them IMO.

[ChristianConservative]

Actually, Founders Tower, the Continental, the former Physician's Tower (now a hotel) and the former Community Bank building were all part of a cohesive development built in the 60's that was very signficant.

And this "we can't save everything" argument is lame. Scores of buildings are torn down in OKC without any sort of protest.

But there are some that are truly unique and worth saving and the Continental was one of them IMO.

What's so special about a big black and white box? Harkins theater has more architecture in it than the Continental did.

I didn't say we can't save everything. I said just because a building is old, doesn't mean it's worth saving. Many people didn't protest the demolision of the Continental, because it simply wasn't architecturally significant.

[Pete]

Many people didn't protest the demolision of the Continental

Yet, many people are doing just that here which is what you are trying to dismiss.

It was far more than a box and as mentioned, part of a bigger development that was quite significant.

[ChristianConservative]

Looking at the pictures posted, and still having looked at the actual structure itself, I see nothing architecturally significant. The place could house a Walgreens.

[Centerback]

"opinions vary" -Dalton, in Roadhouse.

[BDP]

Man, that place was nicer that I even remembered it. I guess it's just been relegated to the Vanished Splendor IV, along with all the other buildings and places torn down because OKC wanted more parking.

I see nothing architecturally significant.

I know, because there are so many theaters and venues like it in Oklahoma City these days.

Will Rogers theater, Tower Theater, Sooner Theater, or even the May Theater

These places are much different and didn't have the type of screens The Continental was built for. Those are nice for the quaintness and the Continental noted for its majesty and acoustics. None have a lobby nearly as nice as the Continental's and now there's not one in the city, save for the Civic Center.

Basically when chains like Harkins build theaters like their Cine Capri's today, they are trying to recapture what theaters like The Continental achieved. Oklahoma City lost an original, regardless of its age. There are several buildings its age which are not worth saving, but The Continental's originality and its rarity in today’s community along with its potential versatility of use certainly would have made it worth it.

In any event, it comes down to opportunity cost. No doubt that was worth saving against putting in parking or more office space. It's that recklessness that characterizes Oklahoma City's development atmosphere and why we have so little character compared to many city's our size and compared to our own past.

BTW, have you ever been to a similar venue like the ones I listed?

[The Old Downtown Guy]

. . . It was far more than a box and as mentioned, part of a bigger development that was quite significant.

Your point is well taken Malibu. The mid-century modern Continental Theater building was an important element in a larger development and its loss shouldn't be casually dismissed. The posts by BDP regarding its significance as an important class of venue are totally on target as well.

The comments describing it as just a box and suggesting that only extremely ornate buildings such as the Criterion, Skirvin etc. are worth saving simply indicates a rather narrow appreciation of architecture. Unfortunately, there are plenty of folks that share that opinion here in OKC.

I think it was simple economics that sealed the fate of the Continental however. It was loaded with asbestos and couldn't attract a visionary buyer with the resources to leverage its many assets into a viable project. Had it remained in place for a few more years, I am fairly confident that it could have enjoyed a new life as a mixed use entertainment venue.

[Pete]

I don't buy the asbestos excuse (not from you ODG but just in general).

It had to be removed before the place could be demolished anyway. And virtually any building built before 1975 is full of the stuff yet thousands of them from that era have been renovated and/or converted to other uses.


I hope something worthwhile goes up in it's place but I'm not optimistic.

[The Old Downtown Guy]

I don't buy the asbestos excuse (not from you ODG but just in general).

It had to be removed before the place could be demolished anyway. And virtually any building built before 1975 is full of the stuff yet thousands of them from that era have been renovated and/or converted to other uses.


I hope something worthwhile goes up in it's place but I'm not optimistic.

Right again Malibu, the hazardous material had to come out before demolition. I think the pre-demo removal process is a little less expensive than if the building was being rehabbed, but as you pointed out, asbestos abatement is a straw man thrown up to devalue a property which often makes demolition a more likely outcome. Especially in markets like OKC where there is so little history of creative adaptive reuse.

In OKC, the most popular adaptive reuse is surface parking. Some change is in the wind, and attitudes are shifting as projects like Plaza Court, some of the other rehabilitation along 10th Street and the Tower Theater come on line, but we have a long way to go here in river city.

[traxx]

I have to agree with Conservative. I must be missing something. I saw a movie in there in '82 and didn't see anything special about it then. True, at that time it was older and not of it's original opening granduer, but still I saw nothing special. Not even from those old pictures. Same thing with the Founders tower. I'm know I'm in the minority on that. I understand it's a landmark and does need to be saved if ever in danger, but my dad had an office in there back in the seventies and I thought it was goofy looking back then. Maybe I'm just too young to understand or appreciate it. But, I have to agree with what Conservative said, just because it's old doesn't mean it's worth saving and I'm usually on the side of preserving historic buildings but sometimes they just need to go.

[The Old Downtown Guy]

I have to agree with Conservative. I must be missing something. . . . but still I saw nothing special. Not even from those old pictures. Same thing with the Founders tower. . . just because it's old doesn't mean it's worth saving and I'm usually on the side of preserving historic buildings but sometimes they just need to go.

There are mixed opinions about many of the mid-century modern buildings around the country. That was certainly the case with the International styled downtown YMCA building that was demolished to make way for a surface parking lot three or four years ago. Some people don't see the value even in the unadorned work of Meis van de Rohe, Le Corbusier or Louis Kahn and may only recognize some of the names from their rather famous furniture designs rather than their architectural work.

I guess architecture is like all other art forms; at least some amount of study and investigation is required to develop even a basic level of appreciation. Otherwise, it just comes down to personal opinion and taste. Perhaps the often quoted saying about art could be slightly rewritten and might apply to this building . . . "I don't know much about architecture, but I do know what I like"

Here is another quote. This one from Walter Gropius, best know for his Bauhaus forms, that seems to apply even to the modest building in question:

"A modern building should derive its architectural significance solely from the vigour and consequence of its own organic proportions. It must be true to itself, logically transparent, and virginal of lies or trivialities."

[Kerry]

I just don't understand why anyone thinks the Continental had any historic or archtectural value at all. Crap, the place only function for around 20 years. How great of a theater could it have been to only be used for 20 years? Is everyone going to have this same love for Crossrads Mall when it is eventually torn down.

[ChristianConservative]

I just don't understand why anyone thinks the Continental had any historic or archtectural value at all. Crap, the place only function for around 20 years. How great of a theater could it have been to only be used for 20 years? Is everyone going to have this same love for Crossrads Mall when it is eventually torn down.

Ha! Ha! I think Crossroads Mall has more historical significance than the Continental.