This building is awesome! I hope the design stays because it's absolutely amazing. And if they do change the design they'll get a surprise from my good friend, Mr. AK 47.

:previous: I hope they dont change it either. Here is my diagram:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3664/...46df27cc_o.jpg

This doesn't belong below 34th Street. It also ruins the character of the Metropolitian Building. This is a nice design and belongs some where above 42nd Street.

^^^I happen to disagree entirely, if it was in the heart of Midtown, you would only be able to see the crown from a distance, and not really anything else, such as the skygardens. The lasting effect would probably only be as strong as the BofA's impact was. I could, however see it going on the far west side, below Columbus Circle. I just feel open space would pair well with this tower, where it would make a lasting effect.

A really interesting tower that looks like it might actually get built. It's great that so many people are on top of this one.

Typical Libeskind, although I'm surprised he didn't splatter it with neon rainbow and have amorphous growths protruding from the side. Remember, this is a guy who writes poems about feces, a true modern artist

Honestly, it looks like Paul Bunyan & his big blue ox went at it with giant axe. It has an almost complete lack of cohesion & symmetry, like nearly every other Libeskind project. Please, I hope this abomination is not built. Can Daniel Libeskind leave New York *alone*.

Look, I'm not trying to "poop" on the parade here. I'm happy when supertalls get built, but be honest with yourself about this thing. It would look way better without the environmentally friendly axe wounds. You see the masterpiece Empire State Building & then have to look over at his fugly stump in the picture. If he covered up those slashes in it, it would be half-way decent. Skyscrapers shouldn't look like the aftermath of a Godzilla vs. Mothra battle. I understand that tree-huggers, fans of modern art & environmentalists will love this for the symbolism..

:no:

First of all, the "axe-wounds" are not for the environment, they are gardens to ratchet up the price of units.

And second, if you took the time to study the building for more than a few seconds, you would see that the gardens are very tastefully done, with one opening on each side of the building, spaced evenly.

Third, this is not a supertall.

Fourth, I can tell from your posts that you hate modern architecture.

And finally, using essentially the same metaphor (this looks like it was smashed/slashed [like in the Tour de Verre thread]) to get your point across makes you seem unintelligent and uncreative.

And I think I was just trolled. :hug:

I see a negative comment by Starsky for just about every building out there. He's entitled to his opinion of course, but that doesn't mean you have to agree with it.

Imagine One Park Madison... what an opportunity they lost.

I think there are a ton of good buildings going up in Hong Kong, China, the Trump Tower is fantastic. The only buildings that usually get negative reviews are the Gehry/Lebiskind style, which usually consists of a rainbow of colors, built with an asymmetrical tilt or bumps and gouges.

I just posted thoughts on 3 or 4 buildings which I thought were the worst at the same time, which gives the impression of me not liking any of them. The fact is, some people like it, some people don't. Maybe it will take a Frank Gehry project in your city, like mine, to make you realize how completely discombobulated they are. Skidmore Owings and Merrill usually come up with fantastic designs, however Libeskind proposals *to me* look like disgustingly bad architecture. Imagine what could have happened for the WTC, *this* would be the most prominent view in NYC if Libeskind had his way

http://www.arcspace.com/architects/L...c/27libes..jpg http://www.daniel-libeskind.com/typo...b0e18f9bd9.jpg

Libeskind and his modern art masterpiece vs an SOM design of the Freedom Tower. You choose which you like more, not me.

Well, thats fine, your entitled to your opinion & you don't have to agree with mine. Your right, I'm a much bigger fan of classical art & architecture than modern art. This might be more popular view in architecture than you think.

This building is... interesting, but I like it.

i really want the tall high rises to stay in downtown or midtown. im all 4 supertall construction except in low rise areas

For a traditional building, I may agree, but considering a) the design,and b) the fact that it really isn't too far from the "cluster" of midtown, make me really want to see this one go up, (however unlikely that may be).

I think it's a fantastic design. It's daring. And I like how it clashes with the stark neo-classical (or is that art-deco?) base. A little bit of contrast never hurt. I think this would be the underdog "cool" tower of our generation, much like the Citigroup Centre was in it's own time.

I think it is incredible, looks like it is from Star Wars.

If you lok at Koop65's rendering carefully you will see the symmetrical nature of the garden spaces (axe wounds LMAO) are at opposite corners of the structure.

Yep, Madison Square is certainly a low rise area...

http://virtualofficefaq.files.wordpr...ween-24-25.png
vitualofficefaq.files.wordpress.com

Logic and facts are forbidden from New York threads. Only speculation, pessimism, and unsupported opinions are acceptable. Please remove your post.