I would suggest Mr. Hess experiment with running 35mm prints of vintage cult and/or exploitation movies, such as Los Angeles’ New Beverly and Nuart theaters. I think there may be an audience for these pictures that have been ignored here for a long time. The Brew ‘n View tried it back in the day, and I’d be curious to know how well they did with them (though I have little doubt the Art could do it better).

How can an interview with a theatre owner fail to identify a single film, director, distributor, or even genre of film that we’re going to see under new ownership? Besides projected DVDs and better coffee, what are we actually going to see at the movie theatre? Will there be a better representation of independently produced and distributed films? Will we see movies that receive wide acclaim at the major international film festivals, or more Hollywood blockbusters? The list of major international films that never showed theatrically in Chambana during the 2000s is embarrassing. Hopefully new ownership will pay some attention to the lack of serious film options in Chambana, which is a much greater problem than the flavor of the Art’s popcorn.

But there are no specifics whatsoever about what he’s interested in (beyond “musical performance”). To say that he will bring in “independent” films unfortunately means very little, given that the adjective “independent” is applied to many movies funded by the major movie studios and populated with sitcom stars.
Here’s a more specific question addressed to the new owner: Two of the most widely acclaimed, written-about and discussed filmmakers of the 2000s are Jia Zhangke and Hou Hsiao-Hsien. None of their films were shown theatrically in Chambana during that decade (Hou’s _Millenium Mambo_ did show at the Virginia, on DVD, funded by the U of I Center for East Asian and Pacific Studies). Under the new ownership of the Art Theatre, will omissions such as these occur in the future?

We’re never happy, are we?  I’m sure the new owner and his staff will do their best to meet the needs of the community, but they also need to make a profit.  Not that I’m an expert, but I’m guessing that he might go with “safer” movies, until he gets a few months under his belt.  We all just need to relax, give the guy a chance, and patronize his business.  There will be plenty of time for criticism AFTER he actually screens some flicks!

I personally would love to see more pop-culture oldschool favorites from the 80’s and 90’s replayed on special nights.
 
 

It was great to meet Sanford the other night. I am thrilled that there will soon be a hi-def digital projector capable of projecting independent movies. Champaign Movie Makers will certainly benefit from this.
I strongly urge Sanford to give us what the multiplex will not.The little Theatre is an art house in Rochester New York. They have made a success by targeting the NPR crowd. Highly educated, culturally sophisticated people with money who like to go out but hate the cineplex. There’s your business plan. 

If Mr. Hess is true about this sentence “We want to give really good customer service.“, then he failed his first test by keeping the current manager. 
Mr. Hess, if you need a manager, then you need to find someone who actually has interpersonal skills and enjoys working with the public, instead of someone who makes people never want to come back to the Art.

This is fairly depressing, actually. I was afraid from the get-go that this ‘new ownership’ would equal hi-def digital projection. For “classic films,“ no less. Good god, I feel like moving back to Normal, where you can see all the classic films you want, for $6, in glorious 35mm. I don’t want to pay $9 to watch a DVD.

Not to mention the fact that no one can seem to get the current projector to focus properly. The night I saw it, ‘Me and Orson Welles’ was out of focus the whole time. When I brought this to the attention of the gentleman in the lobby, I was told it would be fixed, but it wasn’t. When the end credits rolled, I couldn’t read a word.

If Mr. Hess is really interested in catering to movie lovers, he should focus on playing quality films in a way that shows respect for the cinema. We don’t need all this extraneous garbage. The Normal Theater in downtown Normal, though often unadventurous in their programming, is the perfect example. Foreign and classic films, (almost) always 35mm, with minimal concessions and no pre-film advertising. Granted, this is a not-for-profit, and I suppose that’s what I’m really lamenting: the lack of a decent film center in this supposedly sophisticated town.

I’m with Adam in that I find unacceptable a climate where truly remarkable films by truly remarkable filmmakers like Jia Zhangke and Hou Hsiao-Hsien, not to mention Apichatpong Weerasethakul (whose film ‘Syndromes and a Century’ could have made any committed cinephile’s decade list, if only they had had the opportunity to see it), Pedro Costa (ditto his ‘Colossal Youth’) or Tsai Ming-liang, go unseen.

Although Mr. Hess doesn’t even have to get that obscure. A decent screening of ‘Me and Orson Welles,‘ where every other shot doesn’ t leave me scrambling to see that I’m still wearing my eyeglasses, would do nicely.

What exactly is “extraneous garbage,“ Jeff, the installation and use of a digital projector? The material and/or presentation that might result from the use of said digital projector? Did Sanford claim that he was going to ditch the 35mm projector as soon as he installed digital? That’s a funny presumption on your part. In fact, the digital is already there. How do I know this? I asked him about it on opening day of ORSON WELLES. (And, to be fair, I mentioned the focus problems, too. They do need to straighten it out. It only bothered me, slightly, during the opening and closing credits.) It will simply expand the possibilities of the Art. I, for one, have plans to take advantage of their digital projection in the near future. So will many other people who can help Sanford program a wider variety of screenings than the Art has ever been able to provide to the C-U public. The industry is shifting so much that many smaller films will never be transfered to celluloid because of costs. By the same token, unless the C-U public turns out in droves and affords the Art the luxury of presenting 35mm shows most or all of the time, Sanford may have to balance between film and digital presentations for budgetary reasons. Like Boardman did before him, Sanford just has to be honest with the public and announce when digital or DVD projection is being used. Moving from presentation to content ... Instead of whining and bitching, get creative and develop what might make for a reasonable film festival or ongoing film series that a venue like the Art could work into its rotation - at least, once Sanford masters the ropes and opens up his own possibilities. Then, team together with other like minds (including, possibly, the Unit for Media and Cinema Studies at the College of Media at UIUC), pitch Sanford on the concept, and work together to make it come to fruition. I love and appreciate what the Normal Theater does as well, but I’d rather see the Art carve out a distinct identity of its own, just as the Avon Theater folks have accomplished in Decatur albeit in a highly commercial vein. (BTW, are you allergic to the Virginia Theater for some reason? They show old movies on film on a regular basis, too, and they’re only two blocks away from the Art.) If you really want to have your cherished international filmmakers represent in the C-U and simply can’t wait for others to do the leg work for you, then set up your own screenings - do the homework, educate the public, work with the local press, and put your money where your mouth is. Actually, on that last part, make sure to voice a little humility and refrain from sticking your nose in the air. It will go a long ways towards convincing your potential Midwest college town audience that the films you trumpet are worth their attention, time, and cash. Good luck, friend.

Oh, by the way Kurt, for some weird reason I’m able to hold conversations with Yvonne just fine. She seems kind and courteous with other customers, too. However, if there really is a disparity here between theater-customer relations - apparently, on days when I’m not present - then the classy thing would be to discuss your issues with Sanford in private, not post obliquely here. I get the feeling that your beef is long-standing. Sorry to hear that, bro. Let’s work together to make the Art a thing of beauty.

A recollected history (with many missing parts and facts subject to revision) of the New Art Theater in downtown Champaign, Illinois.
The New Art Theater building was bought in 1983¹ and the New Art Theater business opened with Turtle Diary in 1984 or ‘85.John Manley (1955-1991) bought the building and renamed it The New Art Theater in order to distinguish it from the former business, The Art Theater, which had been showing porn. Art Theaters were once popular throughout the country, showing independent, art, and foreign language films. Eventually, many Art Theaters began showing XXX-rated films, until VHS players and the home porn video market put the Art theaters out of business. The former Art Theater in downtown Champaign had been closed for several years prior to John Manley purchasing the building

Tom Angelica, John’s business partner and former college roommate, helped John renovate and manage the building. They renovated the four apartments upstairs, fixed up the small business site on the ground floor next to the theater, and found and repaired the needed film projection equipment for the theater. John contracted with Ron Eppel to book films. Ron initially ran the New Art Theater business. Tom and John eventually took over the theater business from Ron, who later died.

The building’s ownership transferred to Warren Manley (John’s father) when John died in 1991. Warren Manley was not particularly interested in the theater business, but his wife, Lois Manley absolutely loved the New Art Theater and did her best to find ways to support the business until she died in 1998.

In the mid 90s, a small group of local film lovers self-named “The Friends of the New Art Theater” banded together to help Tom Angelica raise money for new seats with an “adopt a seat” campaign, and “An Evening with Roger Ebert” (an event that eventually became the Ebert Film Festival). Bravo, Inc. was very much a part of that group and highly important to its success. Carle Oncologist David Graham and then film student Craig Fisher were significant in the success of the “Friends” initiative. There were many others involved in the “Friends”, but I’ve forgotten their names (sorry). The Friends of the New Art Theater raised $14,000 in “An Evening with Roger Ebert”. Mr. Ebert donated his time and showed a world premier of the film Mighty Aphrodite. The Krannert Art Museum donated its space for an Ebert Gala Gathering that took place before the film premier. We served food and wine in the School of Art and Design Link Gallery, where there was also an exhibition of the Seniors in the School of Art and Design Painting program at the time. Betsy Hendrick (Hendrick House) donated the elegant catering.<span>  </span>After the Gala at the Krannert, we then all went to the New Art for the film premier. Nancy Casey from the UIUC College of Communications assisted in coordinating and advertising the event. Tickets sold for $40.00 apiece and included the Gala gathering at the Krannert Art Museum, the film premier at the New Art, and a presentation after the film by Mr. Ebert with audience interaction.

Warren Manley sold the building to David Kraft in 2001. Tom Angelica continued to run the theater business until Mr. Boardman assumed the theater business. Mr. Boardman also had the Lorraine Theater in Hoopston, Illinois. The Lorraine Theater was a highly popular theater business, showing first run films, and a much beloved destination, drawing people from a 100 mile radius to that small town just to go to the Lorraine. I remember when Twister premiered, The Lorraine had an overturned VW Bug strategically placed in front of the theater with huge tree branches sticking out of the car, and (dry ice) smoking from the car. Word was that the Illinois State Police received several calls from people who thought there had been a tornado in Hoopston.

It would be wonderful to see the New Art Theater continue to exist.<span>  </span>I have never met Mr. Kraft or Mr. Boardman, but central Illinois film lovers owe them both a bit of gratitude for taking the financial risks they have in keeping this wonderful theater open all these years. Tom Angelica, John Manley, Lois Manley, Warren Manley, Ron Eppel, and the “Friends of the New Art Theater” should also be remembered fondly as events unfold concerning the future of the New Art Theater.

I fantasize that someday the City of Champaign might buy the New Art Theater or that a savvy group of film lovers would form a 503(c), buy the building and continue it’s now amazing 28 year legacy of showing independent, foreign, and art films in an era of cracker box multiplexes.

Elizabeth Manley Delacruz (John Manley’s sister)
Former popcorn pusher at the New Art Theater (in my spare time
Associate Professor of Art Education
School of Art + Design
University of Illinois at Urbana

I need to check this     date. Everything I read says 1987 — but my memory is that it was in 1983.Need to check these     dates too.
I may have some pictures     from this event.

I’m sorry. ‘Extraneous garbage’ doesn’t mean anything. I meant to type ‘annoyed grunt’ but my fingers slipped. You know, that whole outburst was nothing more than a reactionary response to reading this interview/advertisement, which leaves me with no favorable impression of the new owner. (Prepare yourselves for reactionary response, part 2.) Maybe I’m wrong, but I can’t seem to find anything in this interview that reflects a passion for the cinema. He pays lip service to his audience, sure, praising us for our sophistication and our lack of children. I just never get the sense that he means anything more than ‘gee, I’ve always wanted to have my own business.‘ And that’s fine - he is running the business, and I’m not. I’m just a customer who’s turned off by digital projection.
It would indeed be a ‘funny presumption’ on my part to assume he’s going to get rid of 35mm projection the very moment he gets going digitally - but I don’t assume that. What I do assume is that, once digital projection is introduced, the 35mm screenings are going to become infrequent, and then eventually cease to happen altogether. Again, maybe I’m wrong (hopefully I’m wrong), but I’ve seen this kind of thing so often - digital projection is introduced, and then a few months to a year later it’s all digital, all the time. It makes sense: film prints are expensive, and the cinema is an expensive business. It is a business, more than it is an art: I’m not that naive, and the industry is normative: talkies replace silents, wide-screen replaces academy ratio, and video replaces film (Cain and Abel, if you’ll allow me the pretension of referencing Godard). But what kept me coming back to the Art, and what keeps me coming back to the Normal, is that they seem(ed) committed to resisting the aesthetic revision of our cinematic history. Even when I lived in Bloomington (hell, even when I lived in Minier), I would regularly drive the distance to the Art because I appreciate what they do (even though it wasn’t uncommon for the picture to be out of focus - besides ‘Me and Orson Welles’ there was also ‘Private Fears in Public Places’ and ‘Moon’ they had trouble with). I don’t want to see classic films on Blu-Ray - I can see that at home. Once these films no longer exist as celluloid artifacts they lose a large part of their identity, and this loss terrifies me. Partly this is an aesthetic response: I don’t like digital projection. I make movies myself (on DV, no less), and I’ve never been happy with the way they look when projected. I’d much rather see them on a television screen, where the color is somewhat retained and the image isn’t softened. With more expensive films in a multiplex, it’s different: colors are often too bright (especially reds and blues), contrast is lost, and there is no texture to the image. Of course, this doesn’t help the independent filmmaker, who needs the revenue generated from a theatrical screening in order to continue making films. And I’m fine with that: in fact, that’s the one part of the interview that truly thrills me. If the Art starts screening local work, I’m there.
As for developing a film festival, nothing in the world sounds better, but I wouldn’t know where to begin. Why would the Unit for Media and Cinema Studies at the College of Media at UIUC want anything to do with me? I’m not a student, just some hick from the sticks with his nose in the air and his feet in the gutter. Believe me, if I could afford to put my money where my mouth is, I would. But if it involves instituting a moratorium on bitching and whining, I’m sunk. Bitching’s my game, man: without it I’d be back on welfare. Humility’s not my style, either: I’ve been humiliated enough already. Looks like I’m stuck writing long-winded tirades on the internet.
Peace.

By the way, Jason, thanks for bringing the Virginia to my attention. I’ve been there once since moving here (I’ve only been here a few months), and they were showing a DVD. It’s good to know they project film, too. 

I type in haste. Instead of ‘the interview….leaves me with no favorable impression of the new owner,‘ I should have typed ‘of the new owner’s priorities.‘ I’m not trying to insult Mr. Hess. I really do wish him well, and will still frequent the Art, regardless of the technology.