Madame Tussaud's building in Hollywood

[archd1]

Another Wax Museum will hit Hollywood (the parking lot next to the Graumann's Chinese) as if we do not have enough waxed-out stars in our midst. The building looks interesting, designed by LA's Michael Rotondi....I like the project which is quite appropriate for the area and again, we are confronted by NIMBYs who wants more community-oriented buisnesses to serve them rather than touristy establishments. WTF, this is Hollywood!, the more glitz and glamor the better.



Bright lights, big critics for wax museum plan
Madame Tussauds wants to make its own mark along Hollywood's Walk of Fame. But some local residents aren't embracing the idea.
By Roger Vincent, Times Staff Writer
October 26, 2006


Can Hollywood be too … Hollywood?

Madame Tussauds, the legendary London wax museum, proposes to build a flashy $55-million branch in Hollywood — its first on the West Coast — on a parking lot next to historic Grauman's Chinese Theatre.

However, the two-century-old entertainment company that invented the "Chamber of Horrors" may not be the most welcome addition to the neighborhood. As millions of investment dollars continue to pour into Hollywood real estate, tensions have surfaced as stakeholders try to balance the big-city glitz that makes Hollywood special with the main-street services that locals like to patronize.

Madame Tussauds, for instance, has been met with trepidation by some nearby landlords and homeowners who were hoping for something a little less touristy. Besides, the Hollywood Wax Museum has been operating barely a block away for decades.

"We welcome a development" replacing the parking lot, said landlord Shaul Kuba of CIM Group. "But if it was a high-end fashion store we might be more excited."

CIM owns several Hollywood properties, including the Hollywood & Highland retail and entertainment center, a failure under its previous owners in part because the original stores appealed primarily to tourists.

Grauman's, which is sandwiched between Hollywood & Highland and the Tussauds site, is one of the region's top attractions. Thousands of annual visitors feel compelled to step into movie stars' footprints frozen in concrete in its courtyard, and many business operators would pay dearly to be its neighbor.

"It's like a force field," said economist Jack Kyser at the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp.

"Los Angeles is a key market we have been looking at for six to seven years, and the epicenter is Hollywood," said Rob Roger, chief financial officer of Tussauds Group, the owner of the museum chain. "We have been trying to identify the right site, and we are delighted to move forward with it."

Roger and other Tussauds executives were in town Wednesday to drum up support for their project and show off recently released drawings of it.

Tussauds Group grosses $2 billion a year serving 40 million customers at its museums, theme parks and other attractions, he said.

In Hollywood, the London-based company envisions a $25-million building in scale with Grauman's, with two levels of underground parking.

Unlike most new buildings, it would cost more to furnish than to build. Tussauds expects to spend an additional $30 million fitting the museum with life-size wax "portraits" of the famous, set in interactive exhibits that will allow visitors to, for example, shoot a basketball with "Shaq" or ride a racing bike next to "Lance."

The museum site is zoned for a large retail development, but builders must still submit an environmental impact report to the city. Tussauds will lease the property from parking lot owner Steve Ullman for an undisclosed price.

If the city approves the project, Tussauds would start work next year and complete the museum by late 2008.

To encourage return visits and generate local interest, Tussauds plans to partner with movie studios and spend about $1 million a year to create temporary exhibits connected to current theatrical releases. Celebrities would show up to unveil their wax images.

"We don't want it to get stale," museum representative Nikki Nolan said.

To address neighborhood concerns that Tussauds might overshadow Grauman's, the height of the museum designed by Los Angeles architect Michael Rotondi was lowered to more closely match the roof line of the theater.

The changes haven't mollified preservationist Robert Nudelman, who says the glassy design "looks like an Irvine medical center" and should be resurfaced to become more compatible with Grauman's and other historic buildings in the area.

Malcolm McNeil, vice president of the Hollywood Heights Assn., a nearby homeowner group, says residents feel burned by previous developments that paid little attention to their interests. They're worried about projects "that look shiny for a few years" and then grow dated and underused, he said.

"I want to see more businesses that are consumer businesses as opposed to tourist businesses," McNeil said.

The challenge for planners is to financially capitalize on international recognition of Hollywood as a brand while keeping the district a livable neighborhood, he said. "It's a balance."

Hollywood's darker recent past is still fresh in the mind of Bob Eicholz, vice president of Efilm, a local business that digitally upgrades the visual quality of films.

"Seven years ago I was afraid to walk down Hollywood Boulevard, and now I walk my dog every night," he said. "It's great that a company like Tussauds has the confidence to invest in the Hollywood market. When I have friends come to visit me, it's one additional fun place they can go."

[klamedia]

I understand the opposing argument. These don't seem to be the traditional NIMBY's say from the Valley. These people don't want Toussads to come in and in a few years be something that is played out.

[Damien]

Appropriate for the area? Really?

It looks completely out of place next to Graumans Chinese.

[future_trance011]

I Like it!!!

Aesthetically speaking, I think this building is heaps and bounds better ( a vibrant, synergistic blend of glassy sophistication and LED lighting) than the Hollywood & Orange building proposal that was previously slated for this parking lot.

IMO, the Hollywood & Orange proposal was a bit too brash and bold ( almost like an assault on the visual senses) with its asymmetrical facade, which would have truly detracted attention from the grandeur of Grauman's Chinese Theater, whereas this building seems to be in harmonious, congruent symmetry to its environment, conveying a certain aura of "Hollywood Glamour" without sacrificing the glitz that is expected of such a high-volume-pedestrian-area.

About the NIMBYS? I say to them, "faggedaboutit! this is Hollywood Blvd.!.. If you don't like the cacophony of bright lights, flashiness, pedestrians, noise, and traffic.. its no place for you!" IMO, There's just no need to assuage these NIMBYs by erecting another bland community-oriented business that has no business being next to one of the most recognized, televised landmarks in the World. Afterall, if they haven't forgotten, Hollywood is synonymous with "entertainment" and for that reason alone, Madam Tussauds definitely belongs.

However we want to look at it, another deadzone parking lot in Hollywood bites the dust!! Time to Parrrrtttyyy!!

[croyboy]

i guess i don't mind... looks cool. as long as anything commercial goes there.

i don't think any residential should be built there (i mean c'mon, you can't just live on the same block as graumann's, it doesn't feel right)

[The Baz]

I think the building looks good. Better than that rinkydink parking lot there now that likes the overcharge. Although, the actual museum is pointless.

[Elsongs]

I'm sure the Hollywood Wax Museum would be pissed off at this.

[Joey313]

I say it needs more lights shoot even the original wax mesuem has more brightness
but i like it. its okay but it can be better

[Fern~Fern*]

It should be a porno museum....... That's what's missing in freaky Hollywood*

[Elsongs]

Originally Posted by Ferneynism

It should be a porno museum....... That's what's missing in freaky Hollywood*

A porno museum is more appropriate in the SFV.

[Reluctantpopstar]

Damien:

Of course it's appropriate for the area. This is Hollywood Blvd., and it should look like our own little mini Las Vegas Strip. It doesn't "match" with Grauman's, true. But what else on that street really does?

This is a tourist attraction area, and should be treated as such. Tourism is a very large part of our economy, and to keep our economy healthy, we should be playing up silly tourist attractions as much as possible.

I'm just glad they're removing a parking lot, and another crappy t-shirt store isn't going in there. And I enjoy the architecture. It's a bit of a Gehry rip off, but so what?

Ferney -- there was a "porno" museum in Hollywood, "The Erotic Museum." It went OUT OF BUSINESS. I couldn't believe that they couldn't make money with sex.

[godblessbotox]

dont forget all the plastic oscars in those t-shirt stores

[Fern~Fern*]

Originally Posted by Reluctantpopstar

Ferney -- there was a "porno" museum in Hollywood, "The Erotic Museum." It went OUT OF BUSINESS. I couldn't believe that they couldn't make money with sex.

It must of been there back in the 80's, right?

[klamedia]

NO it just closed! When was the last time you were WALKING in Hollywood?

[archd1]

No! The Erotic Museum just closed a few months ago due to rising rent on Hollywood Blvd....I think there's another one where they have the Porn Star Walk of Fame or something...Why the interest, ferney? Not getting enough?

Anyway, I think adult entertainment is a crucial part of Hollywood development. Strip clubs or gentlemen's clubs, tatoo parlors, or anything quirky that made Hollywood unique should be left alone. I hope the district doesn't turn into a modified family-oriented doodah like Disney Land or Universal City Walk...A good mix of establishments would be welcome.

[klamedia]

I think alot of people in this city don't have a realistic perspective of living in a city of over 4 mil and a metro of 12.
1)Remove all of the hookers and bad element off of Hollywood Blvd to clean it up, some say. Then others say leave it the way it is because that's what gives it that unique Hollywood grimey slant.
2)The bus system sucks as a grid system that's why only the poor will ride it. Oh, the MTA is now changing to a hub and spoke, oh no, the bus system will suck even more and only the poor will ride.
3)The city is choking from traffic congestion so we need to encourage people to leave their cars at home. Ok, well throw up some toll roads, raise parking fees and eliminate all free parking. Oh, well we can't do that, now can we?

Some really drastic measures are going to have to be taken to realize Villaraigosa's "Dream with me" vision.
For example, I'm still scratching my head at how a 30 minute ride on the Gold Line from end to end is too long? It's not a private vehicle, it's mass transit. It would take me 30 minutes to ride from the Kingston stop in Brooklyn to the 14St station in Manhattan, and I never once spoke ill of the 3 line. "Oh, but I can beat the Gold Line in my car". Well yeah, I could beat most of the subway trains in a taxi outside of rush for sure! That's why if running critically late you don't fuck around with a train, you go hail a cab.

I think people living in this city, especially those born here and the OG's, are living in a 1970's Los Angeles.

I've heard countless times when penning someone down about riding transit, "Only poor people and Mexicans ride the bus" and this is coming from blacks, whites and Mexicans alike. So the argument can't sincerely be made that the bus systems sucks anymore, the truth of class/race reveals itself. That's why I'm so adament about this "choice rider" bullshit. "Choice rider" goes far beyond whether someone simply has a car or not it touches on class, ethnicity and social standing. Case in point, if a doctor who lives in Pacific Palisades gave up his car and started riding transit exclusively he would then be considered transit dependant, right? Eventhough he has the means to at any given moment go and buy a car, right?

[Fern~Fern*]

Originally Posted by archd1

No! The Erotic Museum just closed a few months ago due to rising rent on Hollywood Blvd....I think there's another one where they have the Porn Star Walk of Fame or something...Why the interest, ferney? Not getting enough?

Anyway, I think adult entertainment is a crucial part of Hollywood development. Strip clubs or gentlemen's clubs, tatoo parlors, or anything quirky that made Hollywood unique should be left alone. I hope the district doesn't turn into a modified family-oriented doodah like Disney Land or Universal City Walk...A good mix of establishments would be welcome.

Ha~ha.... UR Funny!

Anyhow, your right Hollywood is not just Glamour, Movie Stars and Oscar's. The real Hollywood is Rock & Roll lifestyles, Drugs, and beyond Sex...... That's why people come to Cali in the first place. They want to become somebody and live the life style. So let's keep good morals out of Hollywood!!!!

[godblessbotox]

if im going to be spending an hour going to work. i might as well be spending that hour going directly to and from. im not ready for a city not ready

[Fern~Fern*]

Originally Posted by godblessbotox

if im going to be spending an hour going to work. i might as well be spending that hour going directly to and from. im not ready for a city not ready

[klamedia]

Originally Posted by godblessbotox

if im going to be spending an hour going to work. i might as well be spending that hour going directly to and from. im not ready for a city not ready

No worries. You're living in the right place.