Situation. The Pushkinsky cinema hall, the subject of this study, designed by Yu. N. Sheverdiayev and D. S. Solopov in 1961, in both siting and section, invokes two powerful subjects—THEATER AND GARDEN. Such subject matter and ideas, derived from the existing building and environment, have provided a point of departure for our proposal... Intervention. We seek to maximize the relation of the programs of Pushkin Square with that of the Pushkinsky cinema hall. Health, entertainment, social and political agendas are latent, if not explicit, in each. Our primary goal is to render each space, from theater proper to public garden, as provocative inducements to the most varied constituencies. Our primary means is the creation of multiple tableau, connected and separated by an open promenade. In the constitution of this project every space is a theater and every space is a garden. We invoke theater in the most positive sense, as a characteristic of building that through rhetoric, visual and otherwise, transcends function. If building is similar to storytelling, architecture is similar to theater. We feel this maxim to have general applicability and here the fit is made more obvious because of the program of a literal movie house. The project has been developed as a series of spaces and rooms determined by pattern relations. Our proposal is titled “Silver Screen”, an allusion to early film screens that were painted silver. It is also an obvious allusion to mirrors. To mirror nature is an ancient definition of the function of art itself (a negative quality according to Plato). This intervention aspires to speak to the ancient and current relation of art to nature in architectural terms. Art and nature are ontological puzzles, each difficult to define. Qualities of both, however, may be illuminated in their juxtaposition.