The old Capitol Cinema

ofcork

Scaffolding gone up on the patrick st side now so things are moving on.

Nerdlingr

Are they going to tear down the face of the old cinema ? Why not keep the facade of it and build the apartments behind it. It'd be a shame to see an old iconic building lost forever and replaced by a generic glass fronted shopping centre.

moyners

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Are they going to tear down the face of the old cinema ? Why not keep the facade of it and build the apartments behind it. It'd be a shame to see an old iconic building lost forever and replaced by a generic glass fronted shopping centre.

CHealy

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Are they going to tear down the face of the old cinema ? Why not keep the facade of it and build the apartments behind it. It'd be a shame to see an old iconic building lost forever and replaced by a generic glass fronted shopping centre.

Maybe they could have kept the cinema shelter that comes out over the street, but other than that I am happy to see the entire thing knocked and start again. Its not as if it was an old architecturally impressive building, wasn't it built in the 70's or something?

Nerdlingr

CHealy wrote: »

Maybe they could have kept the cinema shelter that comes out over the street, but other than that I am happy to see the entire thing knocked and start again. Its not as if it was an old architecturally impressive building, wasn't it built in the 70's or something?

Yeah, if they kept the cinema awning that comes out over the street. The curvature of the front of the building with the clock on it. I know its not he most pleasing on the eye but at least keep or rebulid it in a style that says "here once stood an old cinema". That picture above is such an uninspiring characterless generic shop front. It could be in any big town in Ireland.

dewdrop

In regard to the scaffolding in Patrick st i often noticed that on the top floor the windows had iron railings on the outside and was wondering why it was only the top windows. Also many people must have lived on the various floors as the many chimneys would suggest.

Oafley Jones

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Are they going to tear down the face of the old cinema ? Why not keep the facade of it and build the apartments behind it. It'd be a shame to see an old iconic building lost forever and replaced by a generic glass fronted shopping centre.

I genuinely don't know anyone could find it worthy of keeping. It had all the charm and architectural merit of something out of Soviet Russia. It was a horrible, miserably cheap slab of a building.

Nerdlingr

Oafley Jones wrote: »

I genuinely don't know anyone could find it worthy of keeping. It had all the charm and architectural merit of something out of Soviet Russia. It was a horrible, miserably cheap slab of a building.

I agree the front is not the most pleasing on the eye but my point as they tear it down could they not at least in the rebuild give a nod to the old cinema that stood there? That picture above is just another flat faced shopping centre that could exist in any high street in Ireland/uk. Wheres the link to the past? As i said in the previous post why not keep or build a new awning, stick some old style lettering on like "Capitol" on it? Instead of a square clock like in the picture have a round one with curves around it one like the cinema has now?
I'm not saying keep the old soviet face of the building as you said, I'm saying give a nod in the new design to what once stood there.

flo8s967qjh0nd

It;s called the Capitol, what more do you want?
On a serious note, while I'm all for a nod to the past, the cinema facade was lacking any redeeming features. I actually quite like the new design. It's certainly not the run-of-the-mill stuff we're used to.

Nerdlingr

We'll agree to differ so . I think the new design look like everything else out there these days.

CHealy

Nerdlingr wrote: »

We'll agree to differ so . I think the new design look like everything else out there these days.

To be fair, its a tight space, theres not alot of room to be experimental, and they would have been bounded by height restrictions aswell.

gimmick

Why does there always need to be a "nod to the past"?

cgcsb

gimmick wrote: »

Why does there always need to be a "nod to the past"?

This generation is perpetually forbidden from making its architectural mark on our Cities. You get the same in Dublin, we all have to live in Kildare and spend 3 hours a day driving because public transport is virtually useless by design.

There are no buildings higher than 5 floors permitted within eyeshot of one of the Georgian vistas, lest An Taisce, David Norris, The Irish Georgian society, and oddly enough the green party(you'd think they'd oppose urban sprawl) have a collective panic attack.

Even Dublin's Special Development zone in the Docklands forbids heights of 8 storeys in the heart of the capital's business district no less.

Our generation is largely confined to marking the countryside with bungalow blight with perhaps the odd bit of bold modernity permitted in the Towns and Cities just to keep us ticking over, the Elysian, Dublin's Ulster Bank and Millennium Tower being good examples.

Oafley Jones

gimmick wrote: »

Why does there always need to be a "nod to the past"?

Because nostalgia. And it's a particular blight of the last decade. Everywhere and everything seems to selling it. It's a cheap/lazy way of forging a connection with an audience whether that's for cinema, tv or now apparently buildings. Not every bit of ****e needs to be imbued some historical significance, especially when there is none.

mire

gimmick wrote: »

Why does there always need to be a "nod to the past"?

There doesn't, and there shouldn't be in my view. I think the idea of including some visual reference to there being a cinema on that site beforehand is pointless. It was just a cinema. If it was an important historic location for a very significant event, or cultural reference point - yes maybe consider this. But it was a cinema. Just because people have happy memories of it doesn't mean it is significant. I won't be insisting that the Vic sporting club site retains some historical reference if it is ever redeveloped, simply because I spent many years visiting it.

Re the design, someone stated it was a carbon copy of every other retail development and criticised it as a result. I disagree. Name one other retail scheme in Cork that it mimics/copies?

cgcsb

All that aside, the building is actually nodding away to the past, the art deco curve on the Patrick st side, and the big art deco clock on the Grand Parade side.

I would challenge the posters who claim it looks generic to point to a similar design in modern times.

Nerdlingr

cgcsb wrote: »

All that aside, the building is actually nodding away to the past, the art deco curve on the Patrick st side, and the big art deco clock on the Grand Parade side.

I would challenge the posters who claim it looks generic to point to a similar design in modern times.

Opera Lane.

flo8s967qjh0nd

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Opera Lane.

But, it looks absolutely nothing like Opera Lane.

cgcsb

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Opera Lane.

Not even remotely similar. Completely different style, higher proportion of glass in Opera lane and the new Capitol has art deco imitation built in, a nod to the golden age of cinema.

mire

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Opera Lane.

Compare the design of the two developments, in objective terms. Not sure how can you say they are 'the same', or remotely similar. They are different in terms of; elevational profiles, materials used, use of openings, arrangement of windows, colours, street profile, design details.

This notion that the design is 'just like any other retail scheme' is nonsense. It's not inspirational by any means, but it cannot be critiqued on the basis of a supposed mimicking of other developments.

Nerdlingr

Big flat faced cubic buildings with no discernible features and uninteresting facades other than the normal big windows and apartments/office space above. The H&M building on academy street is another example. They might as well come flat packed from IKEA and erected on site they're that generic.

moyners

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Big flat faced cubic buildings with no discernible features and uninteresting facades other than the normal big windows and apartments/office space above. The H&M building on academy street is another example. They might as well come flat packed from IKEA and erected on site they're that generic.

Matter of taste really I suppose.

What would you have done if it was you getting those sites redeveloped?

lostinsuperfunk

Big flat faced cubic buildings with no discernible features and uninteresting facades other than the normal big windows and apartments/office space above.

You can hardly say that about the Patrick's St/Market Lane frontage of the Capitol development. It has a curved profile. Overall I think it's pretty good, certainly a lot more interesting than Opera Lane.

The 2004 Capitol proposal was a bit more ambitious in style, if not in scale.

Nerdlingr

lostinsuperfunk wrote: »

You can hardly say that about the Patrick's St/Market Lane frontage of the Capitol development. It has a curved profile. Overall I think it's pretty good, certainly a lot more interesting than Opera Lane.

The 2004 Capitol proposal was a bit more ambitious in style, if not in scale.

Yeah the Patrick street side is grand they've done something different , a curve, but the grand parade side, the front of the old cinema, is what I'm talking about here.

edit : I like that proposal better to whats goin in there now. As you say, its a bit ambitious and different.

mire

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Yeah the Patrick street side is grand they've done something different , a curve, but the grand parade side, the front of the old cinema, is what I'm talking about here.

edit : I like that proposal better to whats goin in there now. As you say, its a bit ambitious and different.

The Grand Parade elevation follows the established building line, which responds to the historic streetscape. It has numerous window openings and is sympathetic to the existing building form on the street. It is clearly not a 'flat facade', by any means. The existing building (old cinema) is 'flat', having almost zero openings.

When you say 'something different' - what do you mean? Different to what? We have already established that the building is not in fact the same as any other retail development in the city centre and your comparison of it to Opera Lane is clearly unfounded. Yes, the design response could have been more striking or bold, but the brief was to insert a modest insertion into an historic setting without trying to visually overtake the surroundings. This in my view is completely legitimate as a design approach, considering its setting and the likely planning/conservation constraints. I don't think it is an appropriate site for a landmark or signature building - perhaps the terminus of Washington Street provides an opportunity for some visual reference point or landmark element, but the scheme also has to balance the need to respect the profile of Grand Parade, and neighbouring historic structures

mire

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Yeah the Patrick street side is grand they've done something different , a curve, but the grand parade side, the front of the old cinema, is what I'm talking about here.

edit : I like that proposal better to whats goin in there now. As you say, its a bit ambitious and different.

Funnily enough, the 2004 scheme linked above is much closer in architectural design terms to Opera Lane and is highly generic. Yet, you criticise the Capitol scheme because it is just like Opera Lane?

cgcsb

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Big flat faced cubic buildings with no discernible features and uninteresting facades other than the normal big windows and apartments/office space above. The H&M building on academy street is another example. They might as well come flat packed from IKEA and erected on site they're that generic.

The art deco style clock is a very discernible feature.

Nerdlingr

mire wrote: »

Funnily enough, the 2004 scheme linked above is much closer in architectural design terms to Opera Lane and is highly generic. Yet, you criticise the Capitol scheme because it is just like Opera Lane?

Yeah I like the 2004 design better. I like that it protrudes out. That there's balconies. That there are trellises either side and in the centre. The big porch entrance into it. It looks different and more ambitious imo. I know ye all don't agree with me but I dont mind, each to their own.

pogsick

Was in town today, this the view from the Patrick street side

serjical_strike

Does anyone know what is happening with the seats from the cinema and any idea how i could get one.?

Lots of memories of going there while growing up so it would be great to have something in my apartment from there.