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.
 
#279 ·
ESB was incredible 50 years ago. But now its not that incredible... I prefer a lot the chrysler, but I think we shouldn't get stuck in the past. Now there are much incredible buildings than the ESB... With better materials and better shapes.
 
#284 ·
There are different tastes, if you like old buildings ok, but how can you say an style is fully overrated? The buildings must evolve, they cannot stay stuck in the past. The ESB was an innovative building in his time, now its a good building but a bit outdated.
 
#293 ·
I guess it's one of the problems that people have when judging old buildings - they compare them to modern structures. Everything that is 50 years old or more will be outdated by today standards. If someone built Chrysler or ESB now, it wouldn't be anything special, escept for the height in many cities. These structures are impressive, because they were groundbreaking for their times and paved a road for architecture to follow. It's hard to say if relatively new stuff is overrated, because only time (at least 50 years for me) will tell if something is a timeless design.
People argue that cladding on new buildings is nicer, that windows are bigger, lifts are faster and floors are more open. The problem is, it's the natural flow of things that people get better at technical stuff. Back in the day almost everything was man-made - bricks were put in place by hand, rivets were heated up and flew around the floor so that they could be punched into place.
When you look at all the new stuff, you will see buildings that are made to get their owners rich. It's not about being unique anymore, because when you look at Burj Khalifa, it's the same repeating glass pattern all the way to the top. These buildings could be just bricks from bottom all the way to the top, tapering to cut some costs on the materials, but they're not. After the market crash nothing is the same. Capitalism inflated everything so hard that millionaire investors need millions from their investments to keep the flow of money stead - after all, how would they buy their expensive houses, exotic cars, yachts and jets ?
Take a look at Park 432 Avenue - it's a perfect example of "we have a small parcel, how much cash can we squeeze out of it?". Minimalism is good, being a penny pincher is not.
 
#287 ·
Anyone who claims the Empire State Building is overrated has little taste in architecture. Also a lack of respect of history. It's a stunning looking building inside and out. Probably the most famous skyscraper in the world and one of the most culturally significant. In 100 years, the ESB and Eiffel Tower will still be global icons. Burj Khalifa, Oriental Pearl Tower, and Petronas---probably not.
 
#290 ·
Being famous is what makes it special. It's the structure that made websites like SkyscraperCity possible! A building that was the tallest in the world for almost a half century. One that not only symbolized the rise of the nation it was built in but the changing 20th century. It's very special. The only other tall structure that is comparable is the Eiffel Tower.

I guess I am not understanding the arguments against it. The design is iconic and has stood the test of time. The interior of the building is grand and classy. It feels like an important building.
 
#289 ·
Empire State Building is kinda "old" for me but still looking good. (maybe because its been an icon for few decade) I prefer Chrysler Building than Empire State Building. Wait.. you guys won't criticise/attack me when i say something bad about US building right? since i am malaysian... @_@
 
#294 ·
That's what I am trying to say. Most modern building are just glass and a repeating pattern, no detail. Stand next to a Art deco building then stand next to a glass tower. The old building like the ESB will feel a lot more alive and detailed. There is a sense of presence from the older buildings, as if they are alive. Go stand next to the burj khalifa and you will be wowed by size and nothing else. There is nothing else to it.
1 wtc also can't touch the ESB.
This bullsh*t about technology making the building better is junk. Is the conde nast better also, despite its ugly design?
Are the great pyramids in egypt also overated because they don't have big windows and fast lifts?
I am talking about buildings not technology and a gem which stood as tallest for 40yrs cannot be overated.
 
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