SkyscraperCity Forum banner

Overrated Skyscrapers

63K views 441 replies 129 participants last post by  geloboi0830 
#1 ·
To oppose the Underrated thread :nuts:


Imo, 1WTC, it's a nice looking tower and all but honestly, it doesn't deserve all the praise it's getting, specially considering the amount of skyscrapers being built all over the world, 1WTC is mediocre at best.


The Shard in london also seems a little overrated, there's nothing impressive about it imo, it's height is underwhelming and the pyramid shape has become tiresome at this point.
 
#74 ·
- 30 St. Mary's Axe (London, UK)
- Petronas (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia)
- The Shard (London, UK)
 
#78 ·
Willys tower, Petronas towers, Gherkin, wtc twin towers
 
#82 ·
^^ I think its just the fact that it was the first skyscraper built outside of Canary Wharf for about 30 years and the first ever skyscraper in London that wasn't a simple box. I love the design and it is one of my favorite buildings but people (and the media, it seems) always bring this up in skyscraper discussions. I'd say its more well known then London's traditional tallest, 1 Canada Square.
 
#86 ·
The Shard in London is overrated to me. I know it will be the tallest in London but the large open parapet on top looks dumb and contributes to a "fake" height to the building. Roof height is what matters and The Shard is clearly less than 1,000 feet to roof height.

The Gherkin is a much more beautiful building in London and is a better landmark in my opinion.

I know a lot of people will disagree with me but to me The Shard is definitely overrated.
 
#87 ·
I love the Shard. But i don't rate it too high..
so i really don't consider it to be overrated. lol


compared to Singapore's Marina bay Sands, which people always give a "PERFECT SCORE".. which i really don't understand why???????
and i repeat... it is so overrated..
 
#89 ·
The new 1WTC for me because it's a crappy replacement for the twin towers. Also it's taking forever and it just looks stoopid. Now if they built taller replacements/replicas of the former twin towers on the footprints and call this tower 3WTC then I might like it better.

It's still hard to look at NYC's skyline without the twin towers. Almost like knocking the Eiffel Tower down to me.
 
#91 · (Edited)
1 wtc : far from being the "architectural icon" that some people claim. Just a regular-good tall building with a terrible and huge antenna/spire (I don´t mind that discussion, what matters is what it seems, and for me it looks like an antenna) that doesn't give any harmony to the whole.

No problem with its symbolic value, but that's another story.
 
#121 · (Edited)
Oh, and I know the CN Tower isn't a skyscraper per se, but it is one of the ugliest structures ever. I don't understand why people like that monstrosity
It might not be to your tastes, but it was considered an engineering marvel when it was built. So much so that it was declared one of the 7 modern wonders of the world by the American Society of Civil Engineers. It was the tallest structure on earth for 34 years; that's quite a feat.

The CN Tower is a product of the 1970s: heavy, solid, and muscular. I used to find it ugly, but have done a complete 180 over the years. I now consider it both a classic and a master piece. It's also the tower from which I judge all others.

I know someone who actually moved to Toronto from the Netherlands because of this tower, I kid you not.


Bravo!
Photo by Metrix X
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top