The two buildings that are being analyzed are quite different, even though both of them have similarities. They both have a Middle Eastern motif at the entrance, where, on the H & H Center, a huge gate stands with a winged being (Babylonian) stands in profile on the right and a winged being facing one on the left. There is a symbol in the center, above the array of walks through the entrance, that appears Middle Eastern.
They have differences as well. The H & H Center, though joined by a large courtyard, has a conglomeration of different architectures, while the Egyptian Theater is rather cohesive, as it is one building. The main difference, immediately noticeable, is the scale. Grauman’s Egyptian Theater is much smaller in scale. As a matter of fact, compared to its reputation, which makes one anticipate a large landmark, it is rather small, even for theaters today, both inside and out. However, its central courtyard is human in scale and feels comfortable.
It, too, has foreign motifs spaced around, with Egyptian hieroglyphs and bas relief on the standing sculptures in the entrance, palm trees in the center of the courtyard and top-heavy columns outlining the space, reminding one not so much of an Egyptian palace, as a private mansion, though much more monumental in concept. The columns that stand in the theatre’s main entrance are 4 ? feet wide and rise twenty feet. The interior of the Egyptian Theater is smaller, though different in space from contemporary movie theaters. When you go to a movie there, you are aware of the walls, which have been patched with plaster, making it look like an antique Egyptian fresco with some of the areas missing.
The ceiling, however, is spectacular, with a huge spray of gold from a center area near the stage, spreading out over about half the theater. Being in a human-dimension area makes one appreciate the artistic pieces surrounding one, whereas in a vast, complex space, it is hard to take …