What do you see in this picture?

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

got it

like hugggggge pijion DOODOO
dat city livin fa ya haaa
ans it ALIIIVE it still movin

there seashell in ocean wot really Kool
maybe one day dufus arcticttictic humans figs out their cheese

da 3rd window far left 3 dudes suckin fruit

it okay is not say

coor is this mental porn?
$ ya nose cummin! $
@ get job as governmini advisorins @
ya think?

is await da great mystory answer
not await cause

ans world stadium bang their balls WE WANNA REPLY
% got wait da dude stuck in da toilet %
@ okay who design safe locks on toilets? @
$ world secret service got da dude on da job $
# suck suck suck #
* it a bomb!!!!! ruuuuunnnn *
" more tea? "
% no suck piss sorry %

two feet < eyeeye

 

[pat grimshaw]

…Anything positive to say on any threads ?

You're not paying sufficient attention, Telstra

 

[Corny]

As someone who saw the WTC burning on 9/11, let me tell you that the resemblance really isn't particularly close. If they intended it (which I doubt, because it would be stupid), they failed.

No, they didn't intend it. They wanted two skyscrapers in a "cloud". I like the "brick-like" or "minecraft" look of it. Nobody bothered until some newspaper claimed that it looks like 9/11 and now some American media is in an uproar.

I really doubt that many people would see 9/11 towers in it without having read about the controversy before. But it was foolish of me to believe those people could refrain from posting in the thread

 

[pat grimshaw]

No, they didn't intend it. …

I don't believe them.

This ugly building is the perfect way for a small architecture company to get global publicity.

 

[bulge]

The Dutch are always right anyway. Visit Rotterdam.

 

[Telstra]

Dutch designers/people are so clever ... go for it
Anyway, you guys are not architects, let the architects do their job !!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-look-eerily-like-Twin-Towers-exploding.html

just look at the picture, the design stood out
compare to the surrounding buildings.

 

[unloadonme]

I really doubt that many people would see 9/11 towers in it without having read about the controversy before. But it was foolish of me to believe those people could refrain from posting in the thread

I'd not seen these pics before or heard of the supposed controversy and I couldn't think of anything other than 9/11.

 

[pat grimshaw]

^
The dimensions and the placing of the two towers are EXACTLY the same as those New York towers! Those Dutchies are playing a joke us on all.

 

[bankside]

I think it is a fantastic original design, and it reminded me immediately of a Canadian building from Expo 67, in Montréal.

American uproar? Please....

 

[pat grimshaw]

^
it looks like a mess, a mistake, as though something has collapsed.

This new proposal LOOKS unsafe and I bet it will be when the earthquake strikes

 

[zoltanspawn]

I agree with Pat all the way down to his scorn for the sophisticated architects.

On the other hand, I like the irregular surface with the purchase it gives to greenery; why that good concept wasn't extended further across the topography of the buildings seems obvious.

 

[AlmondMilk]

I was also reminded of the WTC, but the other things such as Tetris and Minecraft seem to have played a part on design, too

 

[rocabar]

. . . it reminded me immediately of a Canadian building from Expo 67, in Montréal.

That's what I thought initially, as well. . .

 

[JayHawk]

I couldn't see it from the original post angle. However it is fairly evident in the second picture and I was scanning only looking at the pics trying to get to Corny's answer. It seems a bit juvenile to claim it has no tie in to 9/11 when it is so obviously symbolic of the event. The size and shape of the buildings and the height of the interesting design..... they could have easily made the building fatter, the connecting portion in a different area of the building...

I think the critique has it correctly and doubt that it will be built. I would love to see something not being done as a publicity stunt. The idea is interesting. Although i do not know how you would have such a solid connection between two buildings that are apt to sway differently in the wind. I would imagine that has been the limiting factor and would be a huge consideration.

 

[pat grimshaw]

Damn! Tough crowd.

I think you have to be about something which will be an embarrassing eyesore to the citizens of the city for 25 years and also possibly offensive to visitors.

(I assume the country is a big exporter and doesn't have to worry about offending the consumers who buy all their cheap goods)

 

[bw92116]

Has that actually been built yet or are all these photos simulations?
If it hasn't been built yet, is there anything we can do to stop it?

 

[Kulindahr]

Sim City played by someone on drugs?

 

[Críostóir]

No offense, Corny, but 9/11 was my first thought without knowing about any controversy. It didn't offend me, though. I simply saw two towers with a "cloud" (of smoke) around them in roughly the same place as the twin towers were hit, and figured it was a coincidence. Otherwise, I wouldn't know what to make of it.

That's just it. It's in NOTHING LIKE the place the towers were hit. The first tower was hit right about the 96th floor (of 110), where I worked. The second one was farther down, but they never, ever looked like this ugly building.

 

[Kulindahr]

That's just it. It's in NOTHING LIKE the place the towers were hit. The first tower was hit right about the 96th floor (of 110), where I worked. The second one was farther down, but they never, ever looked like this ugly building.

I agree. I tend to get hit with anxiety attacks at the sight of the two towers or things that resemble them. No reaction. And I had to work at seeing a resemblance in either of the views.

 

[zoltanspawn]

That's just it. It's in NOTHING LIKE the place the towers were hit. The first tower was hit right about the 96th floor (of 110), where I worked. The second one was farther down, but they never, ever looked like this ugly building.

I hesitate to disagree because I think your immediate, firsthand experience is the finer perspective. However from a greater distance, I believe it's fairer to say that there is a "rough" resemblance than to say there is no resemblance at all.

I would say A is roughly like B ^. I would not say A is nothing like B.