Recently I have been seeing skylines with certain buildings that make me furious for no apparent reason. haha!

Perhaps they're ugly, perhaps it's what they represent, perhaps it's what razed in order to build, or perhaps they don't fit in anywhere. At any rate, these buildings make me angry.

What are some of the buildings you hate or that make you furious... (preferably with pictures).

Seattle Municipal Tower (Seattle)
I just can't stand this thing
http://www.skyscraperpicture.com/seattle18.jpg


Bank of America Center (San Francisco)
It's like finding a giant brown boulder in the middle of your house.
http://transmutable.com/PhotoMaps/SkyscrapersOfSanFrancisco/images/1592330189-800x1067-111_1196.JPG


Radisson Plaza (Minneapolis)
This one REALLY infuriates me
http://www.skyscraperpicture.com/minneapolis74.JPG


Bank One Center (Dallas)
urrrrrg!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/95/Bank_One_Center.jpg/344px-Bank_One_Center.jpg


Empire Landmark Hotel (Vancouver)
Unacceptable.
http://www.hotels.com/hotels/VAN_EMPI-exter-1.jpg

well i dont know about making me angry but i definetly dont like bank of america sf, or the transamerica pyramid in sf also boa atlanta is ugly and annoys me.

The Omni Hotel annoys me

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/8085/57title1nh.jpg

I think it replaced Cyrus McCormick's mansion.

LMAO. What an unsual thread...I guess the buildings that get me worked up are all those of LasVegas they a e all kitchy knockoffs...

I think what you are trying to say is you don't like Post Modernism. A lot of people
will agree with you.
These buildings were wild and different and novel when they were new, and now
look SOOOOOO dated. Beware the twisty, and novelty shaped buildings of today.
They look cool now, and will look silly 20 years from now.

Not really. It depends on how well done they are.

The Bank Of America tower in San Francisco ain't that bad.

But here's some HK scrapers that pisses me off :D

http://www.skyscraperphotos.com/cit/dhk13/a/igh1323.jpg

http://www.skyscraperphotos.com/cit/dhk13/b/igh1341.jpg

http://www.skyscraperphotos.com/cit/dhk14/b/igh1427.jpg

Especially this residential one in Wan Chai which is in the middle of Sun Hung Kai Centre and China Resources Building. Sorry I don't have a good picture of it!

http://www.skyscraperphotos.com/cit/dhk04/a/ighk401.jpg

The Bank Of America tower in San Francisco ain't that bad.

But here's some HK scrapers that pisses me off :D

http://www.skyscraperphotos.com/cit/dhk13/a/igh1323.jpg

http://www.skyscraperphotos.com/cit/dhk13/b/igh1341.jpg

http://www.skyscraperphotos.com/cit/dhk14/b/igh1427.jpg

Especially this residential one in Wan Chai which is in the middle of Sun Hung Kai Centre and China Resources Building. Sorry I don't have a good picture of it!

http://www.skyscraperphotos.com/cit/dhk04/a/ighk401.jpg

The 333 Lockhart Road (201m) in the 2nd pic isn't that bad IMO. Sometimes I feel it's quite cool. The bad side of this building is that the building seems to exist for the Adv sign on the top of it. The sign seems to be too big for this slender building.

For the residential buildings of China Resources. It just ordinary residential blocks. The only thing is that it's in the wrong location.

The 333 Lockhart Road (201m) in the 2nd pic isn't that bad IMO. Sometimes I feel it's quite cool. The bad side of this building is that the building seems to exist for the Adv sign on the top of it. The sign seems to be too big for this slender building.

For the residential buildings of China Resources. It just ordinary residential blocks. The only thing is that it's in the wrong location.

That's the thing! It's in the wrong location!

The 333 Lockhart Road (201m) in the 2nd pic isn't that bad IMO. Sometimes I feel it's quite cool. The bad side of this building is that the building seems to exist for the Adv sign on the top of it. The sign seems to be too big for this slender building.

For the residential buildings of China Resources. It just ordinary residential blocks. The only thing is that it's in the wrong location.

The second pic, could be a grat scrapper without this "adv crown" on top.

The second pic, could be a grat scrapper without this "adv crown" on top.

I dont find it that great at all! It's pretty tall but it's slim!

A lot of people in Madrid, Spain, hates those three buildings:

From Left to right:

Colon Towers (116 meters), Colon Centre (20 floors) and Tower of Valencia

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v630/kiko2/CIMG1628.jpg


The Tower of Valencia (94 meters) ruins the view of the Door of Alcalá from the Cibeles Square

(Here viewing the opposite sight)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v502/kikoazgon/CIMG2105.jpg



Colon (Columbus) Centre and Colon Towers replaced two beatiful palaces

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v502/kikoazgon/CIMG2129.jpg


More views from different points in my sign

I'm not a big fan of simple buildings such as these two. I prefer more details.

http://www.globalphotos.org/toronto/20050624/RIMG0250.jpg

I despise the Oriental Pearl and Burj al Arab. As well as the Tower 42 in London

Clarion

http://www.supload.com/thumbs/default/clarion.jpg (http://www.supload.com/free/clarion.jpg/view/)

used to be much worse

http://www.supload.com/thumbs/default/clarionredo.jpg (http://www.supload.com/free/clarionredo.jpg/view/)

Archdale building

http://www.supload.com/thumbs/default/archdale-20060202233701.jpg (http://www.supload.com/free/archdale-20060202233701.jpg/view/)

http://www.supload.com/thumbs/default/archdale.jpg (http://www.supload.com/free/archdale.jpg/view/)

333 corporate

http://www.supload.com/thumbs/default/333corporate.bmp (http://www.supload.com/free/333corporate.bmp/view/)

Federal Building

http://www.supload.com/thumbs/default/fed building.jpg (http://www.supload.com/free/fed building.jpg/view/)

first federal?

http://www.supload.com/thumbs/default/first federal.jpg (http://www.supload.com/free/first federal.jpg/view/)

AT&T (I think houses telecom equipment theres a microwave transmitter outside, but its a monstronsity.)

http://www.supload.com/thumbs/default/att-20060202234204.jpg (http://www.supload.com/free/att-20060202234204.jpg/view/)

http://www.supload.com/thumbs/default/swside.jpg (http://www.supload.com/free/swside.jpg/view/)

All these from Raleigh

I despise the Oriental Pearl and Burj al Arab. As well as the Tower 42 in London

The Burj Al Arab ain't that bad! It perfectly fits Dubai and it has become a landmark scraper for the city :)

I'm not a big fan of simple buildings such as these two. I prefer more details.

http://www.globalphotos.org/toronto/20050624/RIMG0250.jpg
LOL!!! That is such an irony, hkskyline... you have chosen a Mies Van der Rohe
building, and he was the master of "detail"!
Please don't think I am being rude, but if anyone ever studies architecture
they learn the incredible insistence on detail that was put into his buildings.
Many people think those buildings you show, and the Seagrams Building in
New York are extremely beautiful.... myself included, BECAUSE of the detail.
One Mies Van der Rohe is worth about 987 Oriental Pearl's.

LOL!!! That is such an irony, hkskyline... you have chosen a Mies Van der Rohe
building, and he was the master of "detail"!
Please don't think I am being rude, but if anyone ever studies architecture
they learn the incredible insistence on detail that was put into his buildings.
Many people think those buildings you show, and the Seagrams Building in
New York are extremely beautiful.... myself included, BECAUSE of the detail.
One Mies Van der Rohe is worth about 987 Oriental Pearl's.

Or the Cheung Kong Centre in HK :)

http://www.skyscrapers.cn/images/asia/cn/hk/Cheung_Kong_Centre2.jpg

I can't stand the METLIFE building in NYC :@

That Epson building in HK is really disgusting.

LOL!!! That is such an irony, hkskyline... you have chosen a Mies Van der Rohe
building, and he was the master of "detail"!
Please don't think I am being rude, but if anyone ever studies architecture
they learn the incredible insistence on detail that was put into his buildings.
Many people think those buildings you show, and the Seagrams Building in
New York are extremely beautiful.... myself included, BECAUSE of the detail.
One Mies Van der Rohe is worth about 987 Oriental Pearl's.
I am not particularly a big fan of that whole movement actually. I'm acccustomed to the detailed architecture that adorns European buildings so I don't like the simplicity of Van der Rohe's work. The TD Centre was particularly bad because during the cold winter in Toronto the building layout whips up the winds and it's virtually impossible to walk in the courtyard.

I tend to find 26 Astor Pl being out of scale with rest of the neighborhood.

http://i.pbase.com/o4/55/435155/1/55365476.79.JPG
http://i.pbase.com/o4/55/435155/1/55365474.77.JPG
http://i.pbase.com/o4/55/435155/1/55365481.78.JPG

I am not particularly a big fan of that whole movement actually. I'm acccustomed to the detailed architecture that adorns European buildings so I don't like the simplicity of Van der Rohe's work. The TD Centre was particularly bad because during the cold winter in Toronto the building layout whips up the winds and it's virtually impossible to walk in the courtyard.
This is the CBD of Toronto, and land is at a premium. An intense grouping
of buildings is required and that will always enhance the wind, but that would happen with any group of highrise buildings, regardless of the individual design,
or layout. You will find the same thing in any of the bank plazas down there.
A grouping of highly fanciful, Byzantine-Wedding-Cake-Extravanganza towers
would in no way be able to stop the winds whipping off Lake Ontario in the winter. That is just one of the drawbacks of requiring a large number of
highrises in a small area, and also being on the shore of Lake Ontario.
I was at harbourfront last weekend, without even so much as ONE building
between the lake and myself, and I was nearly picked up and flown back
home against my will.
When you talk of detailed architecture adorning European buildings, are
you referring to historical ones or contemporary buildings? I am a huge fan
of historical building styles (Italian Renaissance being my fave) but I
studied architecture and learned to appreciate the seemingly simplistic
modern highrise buildings of the older masters like Van der Rohe. To some
people they look like boxes; to me they scream out intelligent planning
and clear thought... Van der Rohe believed that architectural integrity meant
if you are building a tall structure, then honestly represent the verticality with
clean, uninterrupted lines. He did not clad these buildings with tiles to give
and illusion they were made of stone; his theory was they were steel
buildings, so let everyone know that, and emphasize the steel I-beams
as corner details:

http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/472/oct3105cornerdetailtdbank8ct.jpg

He was so obsessed with purity of design that he had contracts drawn up
with the building owners to prevent a ghastly future "modernization" that
might make a mockery of his original intent. That is why the interior of the
first TD building in Toronto looks much the same as it was when in was
built in the 60's, and probably same for the Seagram Building in New York
(although it has been years since I was there).
I know it is only a matter of personal taste, but I raise a toast to the
Father of the Modern Skyscraper! :cheers: Without him, unlikely we would
all be on a skyscraper forum today...

http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/6722/oct3105torontodominionbldgsjpg.jpg

This is the CBD of Toronto, and land is at a premium. An intense grouping
of buildings is required and that will always enhance the wind, but that would happen with any group of highrise buildings, regardless of the individual design,
or layout. You will find the same thing in any of the bank plazas down there.
A grouping of highly fanciful, Byzantine-Wedding-Cake-Extravanganza towers
would in no way be able to stop the winds whipping off Lake Ontario in the winter. That is just one of the drawbacks of requiring a large number of
highrises in a small area, and also being on the shore of Lake Ontario.
I was at harbourfront last weekend, without even so much as ONE building
between the lake and myself, and I was nearly picked up and flown back
home against my will.
When you talk of detailed architecture adorning European buildings, are
you referring to historical ones or contemporary buildings? I am a huge fan
of historical building styles (Italian Renaissance being my fave) but I
studied architecture and learned to appreciate the seemingly simplistic
modern highrise buildings of the older masters like Van der Rohe. To some
people they look like boxes; to me they scream out intelligent planning
and clear thought... Van der Rohe believed that architectural integrity meant
if you are building a tall structure, then honestly represent the verticality with
clean, uninterrupted lines. He did not clad these buildings with tiles to give
and illusion they were made of stone; his theory was they were steel
buildings, so let everyone know that, and emphasize the steel I-beams
as corner details:

The problem is the placement of the buildings and the courtyard. It enhanced the vortex effect so winds would be trapped there, which makes the courtyard virtually unwalkable in the winter. If winds blow in from the lake then things will get worse. Had the buildings been bunched up together more like the rest of the CBD, the highrises could have blocked out the winds. The TD Centre is not by the water, so it shouldn't be as windy as standing by the lake. That is one of my concerns. The others are embedded in the Jacobs criticism in this article :

'The coffins' leave them cold
The Toronto-Dominion Centre turns 25 next year, but this famous project, both powerful and poised, has never inspired much love
30 October 1991
The Globe and Mail

IN the near future, the people who operate the Toronto-Dominion Centre, the city's most important work of Modern architecture, will be announcing how they plan to celebrate next year's 25th anniversary of this famous project's dedication.

Whatever they do, it probably won't get many Torontonians to put on party hats and dance in the streets. But if the centre has never inspired much love in its first quarter-century, it has nevertheless inspired a certain curiosity, early on at least.

As late as 1970, reporters were regularly dispatched to the centre to write up broken fire sprinklers, a sighting of a raccoon snooping around the Banking Pavilion, and the anxieties of bird-watchers over the crash- deaths of migrating wildlife.

The 1971 blow-out of a huge glass window from a high floor of one black tower even prompted a city safety investigation. There were hints of forthcoming revelations from centre employees about more glass about to blow. Whether no more windows fell out, or nobody ever came forward with horror stories, or editors just lost interest, I do not know. But by this time, the centre was well on its way to the state of taken-for-grantedness it enjoys at the present time.

Both kinds of early newspaper stories - hoots of scorn or ridicule, and tales of things breaking or going wrong - were attempts to deal with these immense, solemn buildings: the first, by dismissing them as brusquely as they seem to dismiss us; the second, by showing that these menacing blocks of machined steel and gleaming glass are, well, sort of human.

None of it worked. The towers were still "the coffins" to Torontonians. Mentions of the centre's architecture by pundits a quarter-century later, if more rare than they once were, are usually no less dismissive. It's hardly surprising. The prevailing mood among big-city politicians and planners, architectural critics and others with an interest in these matters is friendly to saving neighbourhoods and old edifices, and unfriendly to the kind of militant bulldozing necessary to make way for windswept plazas and huge glass office towers.

Toronto urbanologist Jane Jacobs's Death and Life of Great American Cities remains, after 30 years in print, the most passionate herald of this conservative sentiment about cities, and probably the most appealing attack ever written on the architectural and urban-planning values embodied in the Toronto-Dominion Centre, and in the autocratic idealism of its famous German-born American designer, Mies van der Rohe.

But cheer Jacobs's humane criticism of mega-developments as we must, denounce the arid monumentality of much Modernist architecture as we should, the fact remains that all the bad things we have to say about such Modern building in general don't quite match the Toronto-Dominion Centre itself. The four early structures may be deeply problematic, and expressive of values now much in disrepute among thoughtful planners and architects. But they have nevertheless remained intellectually and esthetically compelling, even provocative, in ways that few other Toronto buildings put up in the Corporate Power Style of the 1950s and 1960s can match.

If you want to know what I'm talking about, take a slow walk among the four earliest buildings of the T-D Centre, as I did one wet, windy afternoon last week.

For the record, the buildings you see clustered loosely together around the intersection of King and Bay are the Toronto-Dominion Bank Tower (56 storeys, officially opened 1967), the low, flat Banking Pavilion (1968), the Royal Trust Tower (46 storeys, 1969), and the Commercial Union Tower (32 storeys, 1974), all set on a spacious stone platform elevated above street level. You sense immediately what early critics loved to hate about these structures: the vast indifference of the project to human scale, however defined; the unrelenting impersonality of the soaring walls of glass and black-painted steel; the dramatically empty intervals among the buildings; the worship of open space and shunning of cozy nooks; the nearly comfortless stone-lined, glass-walled lobbies.

One senses the ghost-presences of the older structures and little streets that were swept away to make way for the monumental expressions of corporate power now thrusting skyward from the granite base of the site. Gone is Millstone Lane, and missed, too, if only for its charming name. Gone, too, is a Beaux-Arts, columned bank building which Toronto's tribal memory still recalls as magnificent and noble. Scraps and ornamental fragments from these and other structures swept down by Toronto's postwar- development surge still exist, strewn about the grounds of the Guild Inn, in Scarborough. Without them, we would have very little tangible evidence of what was taken away so that the great downtown towers could rise.

But, on the plus side of the ledger, only the most dogmatic Jacobean anti-Modernist could find nothing of beauty in the rhythm and consummate grace of the slender steel columns holding aloft the roof over the Banking Pavilion, or the rigorous, perfect poetry of black metal, glass and warm grey stone in the ground-level areas of the three towers. It's powerful architecture, to be sure, but graceful, poised, efficient, like the body of an athlete at his peak. If next year's anniversary celebrations probably won't make its foes love the centre any better, perhaps it will at least make Torontonians aware of the peculiarly modern beauty of these renowned buildings in our midst.

I tend to find 26 Astor Pl being out of scale with rest of the neighborhood.

http://i.pbase.com/o4/55/435155/1/55365476.79.JPG
http://i.pbase.com/o4/55/435155/1/55365474.77.JPG
http://i.pbase.com/o4/55/435155/1/55365481.78.JPG
I really like this one actually. A great mixture of old and new

Great responses everyone!

Remember...It's an opinion.

The whole point was to vent about some of the buildings that make you angry. It doesn't matter why, it's your right. I could hate those Mies Van der Rohe buildings with all my heart because someone I know died during its construction (didn't happen) but so what? It's an opinion.

It's similar to saying...
a) "I don't like the taste of beets"
b) "YES you do, they are full of nutrients and one should appreciate them"

...Nacho_82, Yeah, I can't stand the MetLife building.

http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/albums/userpics/10001/tower42_2.jpg

Just pointlessly ugly.

[QUOTE=hkskyline] The others are embedded in the Jacobs criticism in this article :

'The coffins' leave them cold
The Toronto-Dominion Centre turns 25 next year, but this famous project, both powerful and poised, has never inspired much love
30 October 1991
The Globe and MailQUOTE]
Interesting article and thanks for quoting it, but the attitude toward
highrises in general has changed radically since 1991, with all due
respect to the great Jane Jacobs.
I for one am willing to put up with the inevitable wind problems in the
CBD- all part of big city life as far as I am concerned. A small price
to pay for having gems like the TD Centre.
I didn't mean the TD Centre was literally on the water's edge... it is
naturally a few blocks north... I meant downtown Toronto is on the
lake front. It is windy everywhere downtown, and that cannot be
avoided. That is, as they say, "Life"! Other big northern cities like
New York City and Chicago also have to put up with wind in the CBD.
Might not be as cold, but I am sure there are even wind problems in Hong Kong sometimes... ;)
In any case, my discussing the TD Centre is intended to be about the
design of the buildings themselves, not wind problems created by
building placement. I was just responding to your comment:"I'm not a big fan of simple buildings such as these two. I prefer more details" and was
trying to point out these buildings are chock full of details!! :)

[IMG]Edificio Almanzor :)

quiero un dibujo del nuevo rascacielos de la carretera de burgos (madrid) 340 metros!! CARAMBA

In any case, my discussing the TD Centre is intended to be about the
design of the buildings themselves, not wind problems created by
building placement. I was just responding to your comment:"I'm not a big fan of simple buildings such as these two. I prefer more details" and was
trying to point out these buildings are chock full of details!! :)
Times have changed, and people nowadays want more interaction between buildings and the community, which was a major problem under the International Style. Hence something like the TD Centre is not likely going to be built today. Originally, the planners wanted to create a vast public space, but perhaps because of their oversight, the square they created turned out to be a wind trap.

While these buildings may have details at a more subtle level, they are certainly not the artistic masterpieces that adorn many European buildings and early New York skyscrapers. That's my point in a nutshell. :)

I hate buildings that have a 'handle' at their top.

http://www.thecityreview.com/sky30.gif http://www.baulinks.de/webplugin/2003/i/0334-kingdomcentre.jpg

Looks like a giant handbag :D

i dont like the bank of china over rated

i don`t like this bank of america building in atlanta

i don`t like this bank of america building in atlanta

I really like this one actually. A great mixture of old and new
It would be nice if it was built somewhere else, b/c it just doesn't fit in with the East Village or NoHo.

I just hate this building!

http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/sixwm/2004/12/328982.jpg

Honestly? What is the deal with the two toned glass? It would have looked so nice with just a single tone and I would think it would be much nicer if it retained the same colour as the rest of the Wall Center buildings. :rant:

Below is a model shown as single toned

http://www.lestwarog.com/onewallcentre/images/building.gif

That Epson building in HK is really disgusting.

I agree with that :D

The tower is not just slim but also the height!

Tower 42 in London is butt-ugly.

The Chrysler building looks awful! :) Come on, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Many of the towers mentioned here look great.

I hate that one in Toronto with the ball on top... the blue one... It makes me very AnGrY!

And that old on in Mexico City.

I hate that one in Toronto with the ball on top... the blue one... It makes me very AnGrY!

And that old on in Mexico City.

You must be talking about The Torre Latino Americana. I hate that one! It's like a box type imitation of The Empire State Building with a mast :D

The Torre Mayor serves better for Mexico City's skyline.

Epson in HK is really awful.

Epson in HK is really awful.

But the neon lights look cool though :D

[QUOTE=HoustonTexas]I hate that one in Toronto with the ball on top... the blue one... It makes me very AnGrY!
QUOTE]

No need to be angry.... it was never built.

I never did like Metrotech Ctr, b/c it felt out of scale with the rest of downtown Brooklyn, plus us taxpayers were the ones paying for it, not Ratner.

http://www.geocities.com/brooklyn_rise/1MCa.jpg
http://www.gmsllp.com/img/projects/co-11metrotech.jpg
http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=410&d=1109284120
http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=411&d=1109284134
http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=412&d=1109284150
http://www.pbase.com/archit_kderek2k3/image/40686982.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/archit_kderek2k3/image/42735704.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/archit_kderek2k3/image/45735334.jpg

i consider Taipei101 as the ugliest skyscraper in the world, its just too tacky for me and it just too tall for the whola area, it dispropostionate the city

http://img.aftonbladet.se/resor/0510/31/RESA-29s16-taipei101-390_368.jpg


the other real hate is Torre Garibaldi a Milano . i live just nearby, so i have to watch this postmodernist nighmare several times a day

http://www.euroskyscrapers.it/milano/mi/garibaldi.jpg

[QUOTE=Artiom1979]i consider Taipei101 as the ugliest skyscraper in the world, its just too tacky for me and it just too tall for the whola area, it dispropostionate the city
. i live just nearby, so i have to watch this postmodernist nighmare several times a day
QUOTE]
Wow, those are powerfully fugly buildings....

@harkerb
da bigga, da betta- your avatar just kills me and I laugh and laugh at it
every time I see it! It is the best!!! LOL!

I hate this thing so much, I want to kill it:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a3/Shanghai_oriental_pearl_tower.JPG/300px-Shanghai_oriental_pearl_tower.JPG

That is far too offensive.
http://www.skyscraperphotos.com/cit/dhk13/b/igh1341.jpg

I've always been annoyed by the ESB and Conde Nast.
Not to mention that Verizon building by the Brooklyn Bridge.

That is far too offensive.
http://www.skyscraperphotos.com/cit/dhk13/b/igh1341.jpg

From the looks of it, this building isn't getting much love :D

Another

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v81/asiaglobe/hongkong/RIMG2062.jpg

http://sccm.stanford.edu/~elling/taiwan-urlaub/hongkong/prime23.jpg

Many people disagree with me but I really don't like the currently under construction Brisbane Square in Brisbane. I think it's architects trying to do something different (good) but making it look like kids blocks (bad)

The thread for the building is at http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=214824&page=1&pp=25

http://phillyskyline.com/bldgs/ibx/ibx_chrisfagan.jpg


IBX Tower aka G.Fred DiBona Jr. Building

Philadelphia, PA 625 feet

OK first off, what is with the new name, megalomania at its best

This one just is too many shapes in one...a square with a triangle on the top with a cross inside a circle...

I hate the Messe Turm, it is like putting a piece of Atlanta in the middle of the wonderful city of Frankfurt. :bash:

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/627/4023194_9458.jpg

Very Angry:

http://i1.tinypic.com/nlcwut.jpg

These Two are even angry-er:

http://i1.tinypic.com/nlcx12.jpg

Don't hate BCE place!

Alot of people have described alot of buildings i've drawn or modeled as being very "Miesian" and I have to say, he is one of my biggest influences, though. His buildings are AMAZING.

As for skyscrapers that make me angry..

http://www.architechgallery.com/arch_images/architech_images/bertrand_goldberg/marina_city_model.jpg
Marina City in Chicago.

What the fuck is it trying to be?

Uhh condos with parking at the bottom... brilliant

Some kind of 80's goldcoast rip off.

[QUOTE=vid]Don't hate BCE place!

Alot of people have described alot of buildings i've drawn or modeled as being very "Miesian" and I have to say, he is one of my biggest influences, though. His buildings are AMAZING.QUOTE]


Don't mind Houston, he hates everything about TO.. LOL!! :hahaha:
Hard for some to 'let go' of the old CvsC days......

Weird thing. I used to hate Messe Turm but nowadays I think it's rather nice. I still hate post-modernist architecture in general, but the "overtly" geometric & simplistic style which some of the architects used back then, has proved to stand the passing of time (?). I mean, I still see newer buildings using the same visual style.


http://i1.tinypic.com/nlcwut.jpg
:gaah: It's beutiful. Glass covered art deco building. I love it!
...you can't argue with taste.

...you can't argue with taste.

In fact, many people argue without taste! ;)

What the fuck is it trying to be?

Beautiful, iconic building?

From Wiki:
"When finished, the two towers were both the tallest residential buildings and the tallest reinforced concrete structures in the world. The complex was billed as a "city within a city", featuring numerous on-site facilities including a theatre, gym, swimming pool, ice rink, bowling alley, several stores and restaurants, and of course, a marina.
...
Marina City was the first urban post-war high-rise residential complex in the United States and is widely credited with beginning the residential renaissance of American inner cities. Its model of mixed residential and office uses and high-rise towers with a base of parking has become a primary model for urban development in the U.S. and has been widely copied throughout downtown Chicago.
...
The apartments are also unique in that they are all-electric, a function of the time of their construction in the early 1960s.
...
In addition, the residential towers are noted for the high speed of their elevators. It takes approximately 35 seconds to travel from the lower-level lobby to the 61st-floor roofdecks."

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3e/MarinaCity2.jpg

God they're beautiful :cheers:

I hate this thing so much, I want to kill it:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a3/Shanghai_oriental_pearl_tower.JPG/300px-Shanghai_oriental_pearl_tower.JPG
I also hated it as long as saw it only on photos. But once in Shanghai, I realized that it fits quite well with all the other freaky buildings there.

http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/2455/pearl5va.jpg

I also hated it as long as saw it only on photos. But once in Shanghai, I realized that it fits quite well with all the other freaky buildings there.

http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/2455/pearl5va.jpg

I have mixed feeling with the Oriental Pearl Tower. The freestanding structure really fits Shanghai's skyline but I don't find the architecture that impressing.

But along with The Jin Mao, it give's Shanghai's skyline character.