Anyhow, I have to agree with him, I used to think "OMG its the monolith from 2001 Space Odyssey", but was sorely disappointed to find out that the pure black monolithic form was often broken up by the poorly executed detailing when the lighting conditions were not perfect. Heck this used to actually be one of my favorite buildings in the world until I saw it up close. It certainly has great massing and all and definitely photographs well. Its just not an A+ building in real life. Its maybe a B+/A- building in real life.
I don't know if I can agree that I like Trump Chicago better than it though. They are close to each other in my opinion. Both wonderful concepts that have some execution problems. However I think Trump Chicago has the opposite effect in real life: Looks great in reality, but photographs horribly. When you photograph Trump Chicago all sorts of things come out that you don't usually see in real life like wavy glass, flat looking spire, etc. I think this is because Trump Chicago has stainless steel which always blows one's mind in real life and over loads your eyes so all you see is "big ass shiny building" and can't notice little flaws like wavy glass or the cardboard looking toothpick antenna up top.
Last edited by Steely Dan; Sep 7, 2010 at 4:01 PM.
|