Bank Of America Building Slammed

How come the artist's rendition always looks so much better than the reality?

I don't think architecture critics actually allow themselves to ever like anything; every piece I've ever read by one seems to slam every new building ever. I think this one looks pretty cool, personally.

And in other news: Bloomberg has an architecture critic.

Wait a minute here. Wasn't that building suppose to be one of the new ones down at the old World Trade Center site? How did it end up in mid-town?

It's a disappointing piece of crap that we've had how long to digest? I'm over this discussion.

those renderings are a little disingenuous. it looks a lot fatter in real life.

but it looks much better than the dumpy single story buildings that occupied it before.

Very good point. Except I never saw a single story building evoke a soaring sensation, dumpy looking or not. What architectural school did you say you went to?

i like it - it's like we finally got a Hugh Ferris building, and a really shiny one at that.

Don't see what the big deal is about?

50 years from now, the buildings are gonna be huge and ugly with interactive billboards posted on 'em.

Well, at least from what I've seen on sci-fi movies.

I've always felt Tyrell Corporation had a really ugly building.

So the architecture critic hates BoA like everyone else in this country, but uses that populist rage to hate on the building? What a real professional.

I have to agree with #4 matty in wondering if the NYTimes can't save a few bucks by getting rid of what seems like a useless position. I don't need an architecture critic to remind me that the Bird's Nest in Beijing is awesome and that glass and steel towers in NYC are getting old.

That said, I can see the top 25% of the BoA building from my desk on 16th Street, and it does not look ugly or out of place. I also caught the Discovery Channel special on this a few months ago, in which it claims that it's even more energy efficient than the sweet Hearst building farther north and west (can anyone verify?). If that's the case, aren't these traits in a building that we're supposed to be commending rather than whining about?

I also have a view of the NYTimes building, which looks a lot weirder than the BoA building, but again it's modern and energy efficient, so I don't really give a crap what it looks like.

I showed a picture of the building to my mother and she said it looked just fine, except it had too much glass.

When I grow up, I want to be a critic so I can be a snarky prick.

But instead you leave inane comments on a blog.

I think it's pretty cool looking. The jaggedness could be a nice theme for architecture going forward.

Please tell me this was sarcasm - otherwise you are horribly behind the times, architecturally speaking.

Did they fix that falling glass problem? Maybe it was symbolic of the company trying to shed some parts and become svelte.

I think it's the nicest large building constructed in recent years. The setting is just kind of odd, shoehorned in among other large buildings. It would look better if it had more open space around it.

Great, put it in Nebraska.

And what do architectual critics really do anyway? What a stupid job.

C'mon, it's funny he compared it to an "ungainly matron."

Some guys like girls with a little more cushin' ok?

;D

...

Owwww, but I tend to agree. IMO, The shape is not inspiring and reminds me of a futuristic building out of an old Sci-Fi (SyFy?) movie...

It's ugly, but it matches well because most of the architecture around there is also ugly. Personally I call it the 6th Avenue Death Spire, since death is what I fear whenever I walk underneath it.

I disagree...I think it's a beautiful building.

That said it is a metaphor for the "house of glass" that is bank of america.

lol.

Agreed. Wtf is this guy expecting? The Burj Dubai?

Its a damn sight better than the old Verizon Building, which they transformed into a massive green brick.