Look . . . I know that this may seem like weird question, and that there have been some pretty useless threads here lately.
However, I really can't stop thinking about the question, so I decided to finally ask:

What city in the Southeast looks the most 'futuristic' to you?
Be able to explain why, as someone will probably challenge your opinion.
(It does seem to be the only constant thing on these forums.)

My choices . . .
1. Jacksonville
2. Dallas
3. Miami
4. Atlanta
5. Tampa

Birmingham, but only if it's an apocalyptic post-WWIII future :D

New Orleans :D

I'd have to say Statesville, NC which is the county seat of Iredell County.....and they're not shy about telling the world.

http://www.co.iredell.nc.us/images/newfront640.jpg

Miama looks kind of third-worldish in some parts, especially the hotels. Some of them look like panama city, panama...i'd say Houston looks most futuristic.

http://www.pbase.com/tracyjo/image/35560861.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/image/31493188.jpg

beam me up scottie...

I guess Houston or Miami.

Houston. It's just shame that we don't light the skyline yup like that anymore.

I think Charlotte looks pretty futuristic.

Certain shots of Houston look like matte paintings of a "world of the future" that you'd see in a cheesy 1950s sci-fi flick.

^ haha I agree in a way.

I always thought Houston looked the most futuristic then the most like a fake set in a futuristic film.

I love Houston though its just some angles I swear.

Probably Dallas, followed by Miami or Houston.

Miami and Dallas

I think Charlotte looks pretty futuristic.

me too; just look at some of Style's photos.

while visiting there a few years ago, i thought it looked like some evil-mega corporate city from a B sci-fi movie (i don't mean this as an insult, it's a twisted complement, like my love of grit. ;) )

i mean, from a distance, all you see are modern towers, and so nicely and neatly organized and shiny. like it was pre-made, and recently. especially when i drove from the southern part into "uptown," it was such a change. especially looking at Style's pic w/the railroad tracks and Uptown, it looks so futuristic.

i posted a bunch of Style's skyline pics on a thread in city photos of "Most Futuristic Skyline."

Houston - too much crusty 80s, very dated
Atlanta - only looks futuristic at night
Miami - too square

Dallastexan's right though, there's areas of Birmingham that are the post-apocalyptic future (Ensley.)

-

Well Atlanta did serve as a futuristic Detroit in some of the Robocop movies...

None, really. Architectually, they are all very conservative.... Atlanta, Houston, Dallas (boring), Charlotte. Miami is probably, overall, the most avant garde architectually. Nashville probably has the most expressive post-modern building (Bell South), although I personally don't like it because it is cliche. None of the southern cities "push the envelope" the way Frankfurt, Germany, London, or Paris do. US cities, with the exception of possibly LA and Chicago, are all moving back to the past, or in the case of southern cities, creating an urban past they never really quite had.

But, to take a stab at southern cities looking forward (futuristic), overall I'd say Atlanta with its renewed attention to public spaces (Symphony Hall, High Museum addition), choices for building materials, and Miami with its focus towards the southern hemisphere.

I think Charlotte looks pretty futuristic.

I disagree. Charlotte looks modern but not futuristic. None of the architecture in Charlotte has really taken that risky leap into 'futuristic', IMO...much like Atlanta.

Well Atlanta did serve as a futuristic Detroit in some of the Robocop movies...

I was just watching robocop the other day and noticed that a chase scene was actually filmed in Dallas. Did they use both Dallas and Atlanta as futuristic Detroits??

I'm sure they went where ever they could film cheaply. I think they used Atlanta mostly because the Westin and Ivy Tower look like the Renaissance Center in Detroit. Also there was an abundance of rundown neighborhoods that fit in with the rundown look they wanted for Detroit.

The Dallas chase scene may have been about money or it may have been about access. Not every city will allow their streets to be shutdown so stuntmen and actors can drive down them like a bat out of hell.

Edit: I just looked it up. Robocop was filmed in Dallas, Robocop 2 in Houston and Robocop 3 in Atlanta. Maybe if there ever is a Robocop 4 they'll continue the eastward trend and film in Charlotte.

I think Charlotte looks pretty futuristic.


I definitely agree. You often hear comments about its looks from the shiny modern skyscrapers to its numerous funky “movie set” looking communities found in all corners of the city.


http://img147.echo.cx/img147/2731/future10ln.th.jpg (http://img147.echo.cx/my.php?image=future10ln.jpg)

http://img147.echo.cx/img147/6182/future23ns.th.jpg (http://img147.echo.cx/my.php?image=future23ns.jpg)

http://img147.echo.cx/img147/8675/future49gm.th.jpg (http://img147.echo.cx/my.php?image=future49gm.jpg)

http://img147.echo.cx/img147/7717/future58cw.th.jpg (http://img147.echo.cx/my.php?image=future58cw.jpg)

Dallas because of Fountain Place.
http://www.pcf-p.com/a/p/8212/8212-3.jpg

oh god no, now i have to watch Robocop 3 again to see if i can spot it.

"futuristic" looking doesn't have to mean it's a "bold leap architecturally" or some other contrived b.s...Charlotte just looks like some corporate future city where the villains from a B sci-fi movie would be based out of.

-

This is how I sum it up:

Dallas: I always think of Walker, texas Ranger. It's futuristic, but, there are still cowboyish things happening around. That's the image their skyline conjures up. The neon, though..seriously....

Charlotte: It's like LSyd said above: "Charlotte just looks like some corporate future city where the villains from a B sci-fi movie would be based out of. " And with the way the buildings look..I'd have to agree. No other city has soo many steel spikes, ornaments, and lights like..Carlotte has.

Atlanta: It has a NYNY style look..except..postmodern, rather than Art Deco. Very nice, very classic.

Houston: Very cutting edge, and modern in some places, especially with the big sleek glass buildings everywhere..but some portions look downright old, and...gritty. Oh, and don't forget the large amount if older buildings in Downtown that are mostly visible from the south, and east.

The "futuristic Houston"

http://img158.echo.cx/img158/6569/houpanlg16yd.jpg

http://img158.echo.cx/img158/5320/downtownth9qm.jpg

The not so futuristic H-town:

http://www.texasfreeway.com/Houston/photos/288/images/south_fwy_downtown.jpg

http://www.texasfreeway.com/Houston/photos/downtown/images/288_view_of_downtown_A_best_20-july-2001_lres.jpg

I'd say Houston, Dallas, Charlotte, Atlanta.

Houston: (Old [ic, but captures feel)

http://tinypic.com/4in339

Dallas: (Love this pic)

http://tinypic.com/4in1js

Charlotte: (If combined with Atlanta, would look like Dusktrooper's simcity)

http://tinypic.com/4in390
(Photo by someone on here, but I forgot who)

Atlanta: (")

http://tinypic.com/4in3g9
(By Matsal?) :crazy:

How do you define futuristic? Are we going by the 1960's version or the now version? The 1960's version probably uses alot of flash and neon, so with that I'd say Miami. I don't know what the now version of futuristic is so I cant answer that one.... but if I were going to guess, I'd have to say Dacula, GA. :)

I'd have to say Statesville, NC which is the county seat of Iredell County.....and they're not shy about telling the world.

http://www.co.iredell.nc.us/images/newfront640.jpg


lol. i just fell out of my chair... LOL

I'd say Dallas...I've always thought that Dallas' skyline looked futuristic. I can't see any of the skyscrapers in Dallas fitting in with New Orleans conservative skyline.

I disagree. Charlotte looks modern but not futuristic. None of the architecture in Charlotte has really taken that risky leap into 'futuristic', IMO...much like Atlanta.

I can only think of a few buildings in ATL that look futuristic, and most aren't even located in the CBD. Which buildings do you think look futuristic in ATL?

At any rate, Charlotte has a great collection of towers, that's for sure. They all blend quite well with each other.

Do colors (facades) play an importan role in determing "futuristic" ?

Houston - Blend of many colors
Dallas - Mostly Blue/Green glass
Charlotte - Spire City
Atlanta - All of the buildings are Brown except the Westin Hotel.

Chapel hill, Rocky Mount, Goldsboro have all of those cities, you guys named, beat!

ATLANTA

http://images.ibsys.com/atl/images/weather/auto/towercam1_640x480.jpg

http://tinypic.com/4in3g9
(By Matsal?) :crazy:

:lol: You're too kind, but I've never even taken photos of Atlanta. I promise some this summer though. ;)

I don't really see how Atlanta or Charlotte could look futuristic. Both have too many spires and granite like facades. It looks more gothic.

Based on what I've seen personally:


1) Dallas - Their skyline stands out from the rest to me. North Dallas has some neat buildings too.

2) Atlanta - Not necessarily overly "futuristic" but the variety of buildings is quite amazing. From the Peachtree Hotel to Georgia Power's staggered tower to the twin towers in the Sandy Springs area.

3) Charlotte - I put them here because of the high percentage and density of futuristic buildings. These 2 factors make up for a relative lack of volume compare to the other 3 giants.

4) Houston - The skyline doesn't jump out at me as "futuristic". It is a very nice and impressive collection of towers though.


P.S. To the guy from Chicago downplaying these fine examples of futuristic architecture, I've recently spent some time in downtown Chicago. The sheer number of towers is impressive and Chicago is one of the truly great downtown areas in the world to spend a weekend. Having said that, Chicago has nothing on the aforementioned cities as far as "futuristic" towers are concerned IMHO.

I don't really see how Atlanta or Charlotte could look futuristic. Both have too many spires and granite like facades. It looks more gothic.

i don't see Charlotte's spires as looking "gothic..." they're not the right type to be gothic; they're more a modern shiny spire, while Atlanta's spires are darker and more gothic, hence not as futuristic.

Charlotte's towers are less boxy, too. Westin, BOA, Hearst...especially Hearst...some of the shorter ones i don't know names of. then there's that pompidu-esque Epicenter planned.

-

^Darker and gothicer all the way baby, yeah! :)

i don't see Charlotte's spires as looking "gothic..." they're not the right type to be gothic; they're more a modern shiny spire, while Atlanta's spires are darker and more gothic, hence not as futuristic.

Charlotte's towers are less boxy, too. Westin, BOA, Hearst...especially Hearst...some of the shorter ones i don't know names of. then there's that pompidu-esque Epicenter planned.

-
Well, the spires went more with Atlanta, but yeah.

^Darker and gothicer all the way baby, yeah! :)
For sure.:cheers:

[

P.S. To the guy from Chicago downplaying these fine examples of futuristic architecture, I've recently spent some time in downtown Chicago. The sheer number of towers is impressive and Chicago is one of the truly great downtown areas in the world to spend a weekend. Having said that, Chicago has nothing on the aforementioned cities as far as "futuristic" towers are concerned IMHO.[/QUOTE]

First, I think its prudent to define what you mean by futuristic. Most people here would think of futuristic as something "new," "innovative," something that leaps several generations foward, something highly evolved. Most towers recently built in Charlotte, Dallas, Houston, and Atlanta are not "forward looking", but "looking backwards." They are derivitative. That building in Charlotte that everyone seems to like, for instance (I like it too) is not futuristic, it harkens back to something done in Chicago and New York 60 years ago, but shot up on "roids". You've got to break those bonds and soar. The proposed Freedom Tower in New York is futuristic... it's like nothing that came before... there is no model for it.

If you are just talking about buildings... there are some that are "more" futuristic than others... that did something very different. Peachtree Center (Westin) did this in the 70s. 1180 Peachtree with its wings ismoving in the right direction. The State of Illinois building in Chicago... now that's road warrior.

But, you've got to consider the whole environment to get to the future. What is up with transportation, culture, etc. The Peachtree Center Marta station, stainless steel and granite... the new symphony hall... very futuristic. Chicago's O'Hare subway station, Mellinium Park...time travel baby.

Futuristic - Definition: adj. strange and very modern, or intended or seeming to come from some imagined time in the future.


Gee, I must have missed all those bygone era towers that gave the appearance of being smaller at the bottom than they are at the top. Silly me, I always thought that looked rather strange, modern and intended or seeming to come from some imagined time in the future.

http://img247.echo.cx/img247/6448/hearst9ah.th.jpg (http://img247.echo.cx/my.php?image=hearst9ah.jpg)

Wasn't Robocop filmed in Houston or Dallas? Whichever one they filmed Robocop in is the most futuristic. How do you argue with that? Or with the fact that ED-209 could have dusted Robocop if it would have really tried (and taken the elevator).

Sorry I didn't realize we already discussed Robocop until after I posted. But we should have a Robocop forum somewhere because that movie ruled my face.

Gee, I must have missed all those bygone era towers that gave the appearance of being smaller at the bottom than they are at the top. Silly me, I always thought that looked rather strange, modern and intended or seeming to come from some imagined time in the future. http://img247.echo.cx/img247/6448/hearst9ah.th.jpg (http://img247.echo.cx/my.php?image=hearst9ah.jpg)[/QUOTE]

Perhaps bigger at the top was futuristic in the 70's when building like that were done in Chicago and London... but not futuristic in 2000... Now, its simply harkening back to that earlier architectural work.

I may be a little biased here but driving into Houston from I-45 north and coming over the 610 loop looks like something from a science fiction book. The funky shapes and the different colors of glass and stone, truly makes the skyline appear unreal. I still have yet to see a sight quite like it in the United States.

Now as far as night skylines, I would say Dallas looks the most futuristic.

Perhaps bigger at the top was futuristic in the 70's when building like that were done in Chicago and London...

Ok, I’m going to ignore the London comment because surely that was a joke. As prior to the 1990’s London’s skyscrapers were about as interesting as their food.

Regarding Chicago, I’m a little intrigued. I must have missed something. When I think of Chicago skyscrapers and the 70’s, I think…”birthplace of the BOX”. Kind of like the examples below. I can’t think of any towers in Chicago or London reminiscent of Charlotte’s Hearst Tower. Any pics?

Please be sure to click on the images below to see larger versions if needed.

Chicago “Boxes” of the 70’s.

Aon Center
http://img29.echo.cx/img29/3381/aoncenter3ys.th.jpg (http://img29.echo.cx/my.php?image=aoncenter3ys.jpg)

CNA Plaza
http://img29.echo.cx/img29/1264/cnaplaza6te.th.jpg (http://img29.echo.cx/my.php?image=cnaplaza6te.jpg)

Hearst Tower Charlotte
http://img29.echo.cx/img29/6755/hearstvhero8ck.th.jpg (http://img29.echo.cx/my.php?image=hearstvhero8ck.jpg)

How about this one from Charlotte, the IJL Building. Another “delusional” one. Is the top really curving? Futuristic enough?
http://img29.echo.cx/img29/6375/ijlvhero1sn.th.jpg (http://img29.echo.cx/my.php?image=ijlvhero1sn.jpg)

If anything, Hearst is wannabe art deco.

^ Why wannabe? Is it not certified or something?

Definitely Atlanta! I lived there in the 80's and it was always ahead of the times. Atlanta is spectacular now with the tall buildings taking over Buckhead too.

Charlotte and Miami are a close 2nd place

I guess none of you people have seen Buckhead, Atlanta lately huh.....The buildings Soverighn which is Buckhead's tallest....The newest addition Mercer/Marsh, which has a lighting bolt going thru the center....and lets not for get all of the other condo highrises in Buckhead....

Now if you were judging on downtowns alone...then no...Atlanta doesnt....but Buckhead is a NEIGHBORHOOD in the city limits of Atlanta not an edge city nor seperate city.....so its Atlanta...

If anyone has ever seen Atlanta looking north through Midtown from either the Viewpoint or Spire condominium, with all of the crowns/spires, Atlanta clearly looks really futuristic. It is the coolest view in the South.

Also, there are LEDs in Atlanta everywhere now, from the 14th St bridge to the 1075 Peachtree lobby to the Centennial building to the streetscapes and parks to the skyline lights in Buckhead. The nighttime views are not only spectacular, they are futuristic looking.

Anyway, wayyyyy old thread.

If anything, Hearst is wannabe art deco.

it's not even wannabe art deco. wow. i guess in miami they also call anything 'art deco.'

You are referring to the Texan who does not live in Miami making a reference to a building in Charlotte?

I don't know about futuristic, none of the American cities can match certain Japanese cities in terms of futuristic qualities (entire self sustaining cities built on man-made islands!) but I'd choose Orlando for the most Fantasy-istic! :D

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/23SuZROn87I&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/23SuZROn87I&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

I don't know about cities but how about scenes:

Former Enron HQ in Houston
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2147/2156771855_ed8dd6233c_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3651/3327665940_23daa52861_b.jpg

Also Hearst Tower in Charlotte is ugly.

Houston is totally Bladerunner-esque and I hope a new generation of supertalls gets built there to remind everyone of the sheer power that city has.

Houston is totally Bladerunner-esque and I hope a new generation of supertalls gets built there to remind everyone of the sheer power that city has.

Well, it certainly has that. A generation of supertalls will make it even more Bladerunner-esque. I think this is the most Bladerunner-esque of all the photos I took Saturday night. Sorry, but I couldn't resist. :):cheers:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5059/5506542075_5c1b19ff90_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5506542075/)
5501473911_5433259c2a_o (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5506542075/) by Quantum2010 (http://www.flickr.com/people/28404061@N02/), on Flickr

^^

Miami 2050: :)

http://markstevenson.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/blade-runner-cityscape-1.jpg

The Galleria area in Houston can certainly be described as "futuristic".
F9ner54K1Qw

The Same people who champion how much of an oldy goldy their city is and all that will then turn around and call it the most futuristic.


Must. Be. Everything to. Everyone. :nuts:

^^^I think Houston looks very cool and has A LOT of tall buildings scattered about everywhere, and I like the general grid, the wide medianed roads, and the cool street signs found in Uptown, BUT Atlanta looks more futuristic at night. Houston looks more futuristic when it's hazy and when it's dusk (don't ask, it just has to do with the silhouettes of the buildings against the red/orange hues). Houston also looks a lot more like Florida (I don't know why, but that video reminded me of Miami).

Atlanta's buildings aren't as tall or as numerous, and the roads (minus the highways) are much smaller (sometimes 2-4 lanes for major arteries). There are more trees and hills, too. HOWEVER, Atlanta has better night-time lights (way better) and spires/crowns. The spires/crowns do it. Atlanta, over the last couple of years, has managed to put LEDs on every major thoroughfare through the city and most of the buildings have complicated, futuristic, dazzling LED lighting schemes.

Just to name a few

-Centennial Tower has LEDs at the top that move up and down and change color.
-1075 Peachtree has a lobby wall that is one giant LED movie.
-14th St bridge has LED "towers" that constantly change color.
-All of the new Buckhead towers and Tower Place (an old one) have really spectacular LED displays covering the buildings from neon green to multi-color stripes.
-Peachtree St in Midtown now has multi-colored LEDs lighting the trees.
-The Westin Peachtree, a 73 floor hotel, has two double decker express elevators in their own glass cage that are covered in LEDs and they look awesome moving up and down

And for spires, Atlanta's skyline(s) are among the most "pointy" in the country, if not the most pointy:

Bank of America, over 1,000 ft tall
Suntrust Plaza, 871 ft tall
One Atlantic Center, 820 ft tall
Promenade II, ~670 ft tall
4 Seasons, 609 ft tall
King and Queen buildings in Sandy Springs, ~550 ft (twin suburban towers that are shorter but almost as "impressive" as the Williams Tower)
Residential high-rises: Spire, Viewpoint, Twelve, Twelve Atlantic Station, Realm, Mayfair, Mayfair Renaissance, and the list goes on

And for really noteworthy lit crowns aside from the spires above (some of the best crowns in the country):

191 Peachtree, ~780 ft tall?
1180 Peachtree, ~660 ft tall (ok this building, built in 2006 looks super super futuristic, much moreso than almost any other tall building anywhere, especially moreso than anything in TX, and it's hard to deny that for anyone who has seen this building up close and personal)
1075 Peachtree, our newest office tower, 490 ft
3630 Peachtree, also new, ~500 ft?
Terminus, my building which has some of the best views in the city, also new, ~550 ft
Gallery
2828 Peachtree (always thought this building looked pretty darn futuristic)

Ok, I'll get around to taking pictures at night when I can, but my God Atlanta night-time skyline views and city driving are really among the most futuristic this country has to offer.

And who can forget about John Portman, of my alma mater, who created all of those futuristic atriums in Atlanta: Marriott Marquis (and in Times Square), Hyatt Regency, Hilton, and Westin Peachtree (and the one in Detroit). Houston has no hotels that can compete with any of those and Miami has one hotel that is kind of cruddy that has a tall, open atrium, but is nowhere near as "futuristic" as those in Atlanta.

The CDC looks futuristic, both campuses, and both campuses are massive.

Cumberland/Vinings area looks futuristic with its towers draped over a series of hills. A few of them have spires, curves, and awesome lighting displays. There is also the very futuristic looking Cobb Energy Center there, as well.

The Same people who champion how much of an oldy goldy their city is and all that will then turn around and call it the most futuristic.


Must. Be. Everything to. Everyone. :nuts:

I think some cities do both quite well. Examples of cities that I think accomplish a modern, futuristic look while maintaining a lot of their history/old charm are Chicago, Indianapolis, Minneapolis, perhaps Seattle, San Diego, Atlanta, and actually I think that's probably it. Chicago, Minneapolis, and Atlanta do this the best.

Futuristic does not have to mean 100% brand new.

The Same people who champion how much of an oldy goldy their city is and all that will then turn around and call it the most futuristic.


Must. Be. Everything to. Everyone. :nuts:

Well there are alots of cities that have one neighborhood/area that is dominated by modern/post-modern architecture and another area that is mostly preserved historical buildings with some noted examples such as London, Paris, Beijing, and even Buenos Aires.

Dallas wins in this category, hands down.
In fact, it has so much win in this category that it was used for RoboCop 1

http://texas.cc/Dallas_Skyline-Dallas.jpg

Who comes up with these silly forums? Do you people have a life? lol

Who comes up with these silly forums? Do you people have a life? lol

Actually, it's a thread, not a forum, and I do find it rather interesting. For instance, most of Miami's high-rise architecture is now 21st century, but then, some people would argue that it's doesn't look that 21st century compared to the architecture in places like Dallas where it is over 20 years old.

Well, there is a difference between modern and futuristic architecture.

^^^I think Houston looks very cool and has A LOT of tall buildings scattered about everywhere, and I like the general grid, the wide medianed roads, and the cool street signs found in Uptown, BUT Atlanta looks more futuristic at night. Houston looks more futuristic when it's hazy and when it's dusk (don't ask, it just has to do with the silhouettes of the buildings against the red/orange hues). Houston also looks a lot more like Florida (I don't know why, but that video reminded me of Miami).

I actually get that comment from alot of people about how alike Houston and Miami are in certain aspects. Also Houston is at the same latitude as Jacksonville, FL with the same climate so naturally there is going to be some resemblance to Florida and Louisiana.

HOWEVER, Atlanta has better night-time lights (way better) and spires/crowns. The spires/crowns do it. Atlanta, over the last couple of years, has managed to put LEDs on every major thoroughfare through the city and most of the buildings have complicated, futuristic, dazzling LED lighting schemes.

And for spires, Atlanta's skyline(s) are among the most "pointy" in the country, if not the most pointy:
And for really noteworthy lit crowns aside from the spires above (some of the best crowns in the country):

Ok, I'll get around to taking pictures at night when I can, but my God Atlanta night-time skyline views and city driving are really among the most futuristic this country has to offer.

Cumberland/Vinings area looks futuristic with its towers draped over a series of hills. A few of them have spires, curves, and awesome lighting displays. There is also the very futuristic looking Cobb Energy Center there, as well.

I'd just like to give my opinion, Atlanta's nightime lighting is amazing, perhaps even world-class. And the ones with good lighting schemes do appear futuristic. With that said, I don't think spires add on to Atlanta's futuristic qualities. I mean, taking into account all the buildings with decorative tops, most of the spires are an attempt for a throwback to the past with a modern twist, ( think BoA and most of Midtowns buildings) and thus, in my opinion, emitts more of a sense of elegance, rather than a futuristic one.

And so, the few buildings that have spires and a futuristic look tend to pale in comparison to Asia's futuristic buildings, and theres nothing wrong with that, but if we're sticking to what the thread is about, then I would have to disagree with Atlanta's spire-y buildings looking futuristic, because the majority of them actally don't evoke much of a sense of innovation. (Which I prefer, I mean down the line, most if not all skylines that are booming right now are going for a futuristic look, and Atlanta's skyline has the best of both worlds in having Buckhead)

I don't think spires add on to Atlanta's futuristic qualities. I mean, taking into account all the buildings with decorative tops, most of the spires are an attempt for a throwback to the past with a modern twist, ( think BoA and most of Midtowns buildings) and thus, in my opinion, emitts more of a sense of elegance, rather than a futuristic one.

And so, the few buildings that have spires and a futuristic look tend to pale in comparison to Asia's futuristic buildings

I agree spires aren't inherently futuristic, quite the opposite, they CAN look futuristic though. They are a throwback (art deco) to a throwback (church spires).

Also the larger reason why Atlanta/Houston/Dallas 'pale' in comparison to the Asian cities in term of futuristic looking skylines is because their skylines are 20-30 years older (at least the buildings that DEFINE the skyline). And haven't added anything significant since the 80s/ early 90s. They still look pretty modern though, hardly dated at all.

Anyway to answer the question of the thread, the most futuristic is either Atlanta/Houston/Dallas or Miami. Basically every major South Eastern skyline :) I think I give Miami bonus points for it's quirky (Jetson retro) monorail and causeways.

But lets end this with a very cool Dallas video that might sway some voters
9260115

Hate to tell you that while Dallas looks cool, but definitely not futuristic to me. I think Houston looks a little more futuristic (I have actually had an odd, futuristic dream involving Houston). Neither seem as futuristic to me as Atlanta, whose skyline is not as big as either Dallas' or Houston's but is set up in a way that's more evocative of what we have been referring to as the Blade Runner universe.

Short clip that conveys a lot about Atlanta looking kinda Blade Runnerish (the night/fog shots towards the end). The city's spires and crowns are more futuristic looking than classical looking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8byFWBtH6C4&feature=related

This video is good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9cWyXnWbMQ&feature=related

This video is also good, but no soundtrack.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66S3fi4cDJM&feature=related

"Freeway Jim" who does freeway clips of various cities drives from Buckhead to downtown. In the beginning you can clearly see much of the Buckhead skyline at night and the Abernathy Tunnel that takes 400 under Buckhead. Atlanta is quite "tunnely", which also makes it seem kind of futuristic (like iRobot and other movies with tunnels).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJs3jxBXwQg&feature=related

12th and Midtown promotional video with some older but really crisp/clear aerial videos at dawn.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3njBBvaYu0o

This is the lobby of Midtown's newest office tower, the 500 ft tall 1075 Peachtree, part of the 12th and Midtown development. It features a mixture of marble, wood, glass, and a huge LED display. I wish there was a compilation video of Atlanta's lights, including this, the 14th St bridge, Centennial Tower, Westin elevators, and other moving lights.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACXosTKNSL0

Atlanta skyline from Piedmont Park at night.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edUqWjKmeTo

@simms3
I assume you're talking to me?
In that case don't sweat is. Because as I said my vote goes to Miami, not Dallas.
I think the difference in how futuristic Dallas, Houston or Atlanta look is very marginal (and probably the same to Miami though it looks different than the others).
Atlanta's skyline may be a bit more distinctive than Dallas or Houston, but it doesn't really look more futuristic to me. And in fact I think my favorite skyscraper in the south is probably fountain palace or maybe the Williams tower.
BoA is pretty cool too but I prefer Charlotte's.

The Same people who champion how much of an oldy goldy their city is and all that will then turn around and call it the most futuristic.


Must. Be. Everything to. Everyone. :nuts:

and?

-

Miami, the only futuristic city outside of Asia
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5284/5302653557_e351aca224_b.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/109/290240929_0a62221615_b.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1164/566282629_44f3cdb892_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3206/3036912590_05eeef040b_b.jpg
http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/4646/p10500501kh.jpg
http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/304/61346663krltaffs.jpg

Charlotte, Dallas, and Houston..dynamic architecture.

Many people like to knock Miami's giant high-rise condos with so many balconies, but living high above ground has long been a futuristic concept and living vertically has become the wave of the future.

I lived in Charlotte for three years and is very progressive orderly and clean..the real Queen of the South.

I've never been to Miami but I find it more like a caribbean city. No futuristic.

I've never been to Miami but I find it more like a caribbean city. No futuristic.

And what Caribbean city has a skyline that looks like Miami's skyline does today?:):cheers:

Well. I mean Miami has more latin flavor (Cubans, Venezuelans,Dominicans, Mexicans, etc) This gives another spirits to Miami, I never said that it is not modern, but I don't think futuristic.

Well. I mean Miami has more latin flavor (Cubans, Venezuelans,Dominicans, Mexicans, etc) This gives another spirits to Miami, I never said that it is not modern, but I don't think futuristic.

Well, first of all, the thread title is "What Southeastern City looks the most Futuristic?" It doesn't ask what kind of flavor it has. That is what I was addressing and not the fact that somebody might have thought you said it is not modern. And my point in saying that Miami is futuristic is the fact that we now have the potential for a large number of people to live vertically and who do live vertically, which contributes less to habitat loss and deforestation. This is the future of our planet with earth's human population increasing exponentially. Now, since you've never been to Miami as you said, just click on the link in my signature line.

Thank's QuantumX. I done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Biscayne_Boulevard_night_20101202.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bb/Biscayne_Boulevard_night_20101202.jpg/800px-Biscayne_Boulevard_night_20101202.jpg

I'll go with Miami on this one. It looks like a futuristic car ad (via quantumx's pics). It seems to have had the most recent boom too based on the old school photo thread.

I'll go with Miami on this one. It looks like a futuristic car ad (via quantumx's pics). It seems to have had the most recent boom too based on the old school photo thread.

Well, I'm glad somebody noticed! Thanks! And yes, we had one of the largest one-time building booms in history last decade. Anyway, I decided to put together this compilation of what I think are some of our most futuristic looking projects.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2673/3933287064_343099ae4f_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5055/5500620402_4de715f2f8_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5500620402/)
DSC_0189 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5500620402/) by Quantum2010 (http://www.flickr.com/people/28404061@N02/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5165/5338198708_d405d95920_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5338198708/)
DSC_0728 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5338198708/) by Quantum2010 (http://www.flickr.com/people/28404061@N02/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5213/5483532780_d22763365b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5483532780/)
DSCN3052 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5483532780/) by Quantum2010 (http://www.flickr.com/people/28404061@N02/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5171/5521160875_551b26a863_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5521160875/)
5338198722_abb9678431_b (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5521160875/) by Quantum2010 (http://www.flickr.com/people/28404061@N02/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5011/5428826647_b7f3cd6718_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5428826647/)
DSC_0765 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5428826647/) by Quantum2010 (http://www.flickr.com/people/28404061@N02/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5135/5400599123_d3127289a8_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5400599123/)
DSC_0821 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5400599123/) by Quantum2010 (http://www.flickr.com/people/28404061@N02/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5212/5499785149_2193d42435_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5499785149/)
DSC_0286 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5499785149/) by Quantum2010 (http://www.flickr.com/people/28404061@N02/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4053/4492272667_5f60bbd04f_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5139/5509616747_5c2e325039_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5509616747/)
DSC_0631 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5509616747/) by Quantum2010 (http://www.flickr.com/people/28404061@N02/), on Flickr

Most of Miami is a bit run down and infrastructureless as its population does not have the buying power of other cities (Houston, Dallas)

Atlanta is ok, but would not consider it that modern looking since it does have a southern small town feel at times.

I would have to say either Houston or Dallas, with Houston being much more filled out and much more highrises all over the place.

Miami.

Most of Miami is a bit run down and infrastructureless as its population does not have the buying power of other cities (Houston, Dallas)

Oh you really never disappoint. But what do you mean buying power? I don't get the correlation with "looking futuristic" or having infrastructure which I can assure you it has. But if you mean purchasing power, Miami does in fact have the highest purchasing power of any city in the country.

That is according to some UBS study that skipped all but four American cities: New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and for some reason Miami.

Most of Miami is a bit run down and infrastructureless as its population does not have the buying power of other cities (Houston, Dallas)

Atlanta is ok, but would not consider it that modern looking since it does have a southern small town feel at times.

I would have to say either Houston or Dallas, with Houston being much more filled out and much more highrises all over the place.

What? Atlanta has a "southern small town" feel at times, like Mayberry I assume. So do Dallas and Houston, if you are comparing Atlanta, Dallas and Houston to NY or Chicago.

Miami looks the most futuristic.

Miami does look futuristic but so does Altanta, Dallas, Houston also...

besides Austin more futuristic...

All cities look futuristic, Miami is one giant leap above the rest though.

what about technology and eco friendly seems Austin would be up top?

Futuristic is referring to aesthetics, maybe you're thinking looking to the future? The Washington metro area has more tech workers than any other region of the U.S. (technically it is in the South), but nobody would describe it as futuristic.

ok cool...

Actually I checked again, LA has the highest number of tech workers, DC is second :bash:

True.. and I see your point, :)

what about technology and eco friendly seems Austin would be up top?

What southeastern city LOOKS the most futuristic though? I say Miami with so many recently built skyscrapers where you have a lot of choice in living in the sky.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4133/5059404057_7f34267878_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4492272665_0bd0b36188_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4072/4547875268_afa313b21c_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4046/4496038697_0f0cd6dbc6_b.jpg

I'd have to vote for Atlanta, then Miami. Buckhead, specifically is one the most futuristic areas in the South.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/15566826@N00/4363619217#/photos/michaelbaumann/4363619217/lightbox/

Miami vs a typical North American city (i.e. Southern cities):

Palm trees (Miami) are more futuristic than 'regular' trees (Texas/Atlanta)
Yachts (Miami) are more futuristic than cars (Texas/Atlanta)
White buildings (Miami) are more futuristic than beige (Texas/Atlanta)
Buildings with lots of lights (Miami) are more futuristic than without (Texas/Atlanta)
Elevated heavy rail that snakes through and even inside of skyscrapers (Miami) is more futuristic than little or no heavy rail (Texas/Atlanta)

Most of Miami is a bit run down and infrastructureless as its population does not have the buying power of other cities (Houston, Dallas)

Atlanta is ok, but would not consider it that modern looking since it does have a southern small town feel at times.

I would have to say either Houston or Dallas, with Houston being much more filled out and much more highrises all over the place.

I agree with you Miami is like a third world country
That is why I left that place
Dallas and Houston are on a different level
I will say houston win this one

I agree with you Miami is like a third world country
That is why I left that place

And how long ago was that?

Miami vs a typical North American city (i.e. Southern cities):

Palm trees (Miami) are more futuristic than 'regular' trees (Texas/Atlanta)
Yachts (Miami) are more futuristic than cars (Texas/Atlanta)
White buildings (Miami) are more futuristic than beige (Texas/Atlanta)
Buildings with lots of lights (Miami) are more futuristic than without (Texas/Atlanta)
Elevated heavy rail that snakes through and even inside of skyscrapers (Miami) is more futuristic than little or no heavy rail (Texas/Atlanta)

Just so you know Texas has palm trees too especially Houston. Also the Clear Lake area of Houston alone has one of the largest concentrations of recreational boats and marinas in the nation.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/79/HighlandVillageShoppingCenter.JPG/800px-HighlandVillageShoppingCenter.JPG

http://www.rentshout.com/listing_uploads/23872/5154/orig/4599AP01.JPG

Besides the MARTA system in Atlanta is considered heavy rail and has more miles/ridership than the Miami Metrorail.

Palm trees (Miami) are more futuristic than 'regular' trees (Texas/Atlanta)


:lol:

Miami vs a typical North American city (i.e. Southern cities):

Palm trees (Miami) are more futuristic than 'regular' trees (Texas/Atlanta)
Yachts (Miami) are more futuristic than cars (Texas/Atlanta)
White buildings (Miami) are more futuristic than beige (Texas/Atlanta)
Buildings with lots of lights (Miami) are more futuristic than without (Texas/Atlanta)
Elevated heavy rail that snakes through and even inside of skyscrapers (Miami) is more futuristic than little or no heavy rail (Texas/Atlanta)

First of all there is nothing "futuristic" about palm trees, which Texas has by the way (maybe travel a little bit more?).

Second of all, yachts ooze recreation, wealth, and free time, but they do not ooze "futuristic" and those yachts aren't used like cars :hammer:. Ever been to any other coastal city aside from Gulf Coast cities not in Florida? They all have yachts, boats, harbors, and marinas, just fewer yachts. Very un-progressive, un-futuristic Jacksonville even has yachts. The Moran family from Deerfield Beach often parks their 250 ft yacht in downtown Jax and they aren't alone.

Third of all, white buildings have a sleek, clean look but aren't necessarily futuristic. Glass is much more potentially futuristic looking than white painted cement to me.

Fourth of all, Miami has a decent amount of lights, but I have tons of experience practically living in both cities and Atlanta has more lights on its skyscrapers than Miami, and lights of all colors.

Fifth of all, Atlanta has a much more extensive heavy rail than Miami does. Atlanta has cooler stations (elevated, at grade, and subway) and upgraded cars. Miami has an old almost bus-like metromover downtown and old style rail cars on the metro. Houston has the most futuristic looking cars on its light rail system.

The people mover is pretty awesome

http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/764/captureesb.png
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2704/4449144776_15690d02bc_z.jpg?zz=1
Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/46069104@N08/4449144776/)

-

Sixth of all, you took it seriously bro? :ohno:

Seventh of all, all cities with some highrises built in the past decade have glass highrises, Atlanta and the major Texas cities don't have many white highrises however.

Eighth of all, Bank of America in Miami has more lights than all of Atlanta.

Sixth of all, you took it seriously bro? :ohno:

Seventh of all, all cities with some highrises built in the past decade have glass highrises, Atlanta and the major Texas cities don't have many white highrises however.

Eighth of all, Bank of America in Miami has more lights than all of Atlanta.

Bank of America fell on hard times and had to consolidate into their smaller Brickell Avenue tower. This is now called the Miami Tower, until it attracts another major tenant.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5203/5242774661_bfb5c4f135_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5242774661/)
DSC_0265 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5242774661/) by Quantum2010 (http://www.flickr.com/people/28404061@N02/), on Flickr

Since the title of the thread clearly says "Southeastern City", I have to go with Atlanta on this one, with Miami being a close second. Although both Houston and Dallas are equally as impressive, they are not located in the Southeast (sorry).

Since the title of the thread clearly says "Southeastern City", I have to go with Atlanta on this one, with Miami being a close second. Although both Houston and Dallas are equally as impressive, they are not located in the Southeast (sorry).

But in actually though, Texas is included in the Southeast forum, while Florida and Miami are not because they have their own forum.

I agree with you Miami is like a third world country
That is why I left that place
Dallas and Houston are on a different level
I will say houston win this one

So says the man who in lives in sprawville USA. You been complaning about Miami for years now.There's nothing futuristic about Arizona also.

The people mover is pretty awesome

I think Detroit's People Mover system is more futuristic though. The Miami Metromover seems kind of dated.

I think Detroit's People Mover system is more futuristic though. The Miami Metromover seems kind of dated.

Actually, it is! It's over 20 years old now, and I was never all that impressed with the rubber tires.

I'm on it right now and without it Miami would not be Miami without it. The Metromover.


It also looks very futuristic at night as you're driving through downtown and you see it going above you. A real sign of an increase in downtownism would be if a. They expanded it b. It went all night.

Im sorry to Detroit and Miami but a people's mover that only does a circle around downtown isnt futuristic in my eyes....Hell Memphis has a monorail....which isnt futuristic at all....maybe if this was 1950s then maybe but 2011?...Not at all...

Miami's at least does three loops and has almost twice the length, is free and has a ton more ridership than Detroit's. Also MIA has the new MIA mover, intermodal center, and is just plain a much bigger metropolis that other southeastern cities. If downtown moves west any farther than it already has a new line to Metromover could be added.

Dallas, Houston, and Miami not sure which one is first.

Things like:

The Blue Miami Tower http://www.flickr.com/photos/rcadimensia/5505415760/

And the rainbow Metrorail neon lights http://www.flickr.com/photos/rcadimensia/5504819577/
Also look at the new/neat/clean landscaping in the bottom right of that one because everything is new here.

Don't hurt Miami's modern look

Now this is TRULY Miami's futuristic mode of transportation! When the ice caps melt, and the seas rise, we'll be ready!:):cheers:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5305/5583158877_d50b183c11_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5583158877/)DSCN1662 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28404061@N02/5583158877/) by Quantum2010 (http://www.flickr.com/people/28404061@N02/), on Flickr

I think Detroit's People Mover system is more futuristic though. The Miami Metromover seems kind of dated.

They're both from the 80's, but Miami's just got a bunch of new (at least half of them now are) the new bombardier cars (which I actually like less because you can't see out at night as much because they're brighter and you can't sit on the ends and look out the window at any time like the old ones which have end seats), Miami's is almost twice the track length, has wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy higher ridership, and is increasing in ridership-Metromover ridership actually went UP when Metrorail and Metrobus went DOWN last year. Ridership is counted by the infrared sensors at the gates. Since I have nothing to do tomorrow and no life anyway I should go to all the stations and run my hand over the sensor a bunch of times (all day) so they think ridership is skyrocketing. :lol::lol: Our's has also grown since it's inception because our city is growing, unlike Detroit. The Brickell loop was added in the 90s because in '86 Brickell was basically non existant as part of downtown. Now it's on it's way to becoming bigger than downtown.


Were the Brickell and Omni loops really both added at the same time in 1994?


OH MY GOD I FOUND AN ARTICLE FROM 1987, a time long forgotten!
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1987-04-15/news/8701240264_1_ridership-metromover-people-mover-system
The "new" Bayside increases ridership :lol: :rofl:

and is just plain a much bigger metropolis that other southeastern cities.

Whoa, hold up with MIA being the 'King of the South' just yet. Maybe it is in slight terms of metro population since Cape Canaveral to Key West magically is in Miami's metro (joking) but in terms of F-500's Miami is more in comp with JAX than ATL. Even JAX[with 3 F-500's] technically has more than MIA with two. ATL has has ten Fortune 500's not even counting the suburban ones, and MIA just has two, three counting Ft Lauderdale. Businesswise, it's not even close between MIA and ATL.

The Port of Miami Tunnel definitely won't hurt Miami's sleek, futuristic look. It may also lead indirectly to more development via a better economy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Miami_Tunnel/

^^BTW I wrote that and it's one of the better articles on wikipedia (in the 1 out of 309 demographic of good articles).