The Great Canadian Skyline Thread!

[G.S MTL]

PVM Ugly? Lol wow



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f1/Place_Ville_Marie.jpg

[The_Architect]

^ Yeah that just backs up my opinion. There's nothing special about it. It's essentially shoving 4 mediocre 6's office buildings into one spot. It's chunky and plain. I really don't get the appeal.

I guarantee if it was in Toronto nobody would say anything about it (probably would call it ugly actually).

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

PVM is my favourite in Montreal. It just makes me happy, somehow.

But this one, the circular one near centre left:

Gawd, I hate it so hard. It ruins skyline shots from Mount Royal for me. It's like... The Rooms Lite, to me, personally - obviously, I know The Rooms is objectively WAY worse.

Yes it's terrible. That's also one of the things that bothers me from the mountain view. The other being the drop off in height to the west past 1250 René-Lévesque is rather awkward and jarring.

[The_Architect]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Aside from it's shape? That's like saying aside from it's shape there's really nothing unique about the Bow, or aside from it's height, there's really nothing unique about the CN tower.

How many defining characteristics does one building need?

Hahahaha oh man there's a stretch if I've ever seen one. It's a plus sign, who gives a shit. You cannot possibly compare it to iconic structures like the Bow and the CN Tower.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Aside from it's shape? That's like saying aside from it's shape there's really nothing unique about the Bow, or aside from it's height, there's really nothing unique about the CN tower.

How many defining characteristics does one building need?

Especially considering that PVM is a classic exemple of International Style, where less is more. The shape becomes the statement.

Surprisingly though, PVM is a building that changes a lot depending on the angle, the light of the day or the season and where you are when looking at it. When I drive on Sherbrooke street east/west and it appears at the end of the curve after Notre-Dame hospital, it's a vision. It looks twice as big as it really is and it's just epic. Also, at night, with the light, it's also epic ands romantic. I genuinely don't understand how one can find it just ok, never mind ugly, but I guess it's a building that grows on you, it's iconic, and maybe you have to live in Montreal to be able to appreciate all this. My 2 cents.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by The_Architect

Hahahaha oh man there's a stretch if I've ever seen one. It's a plus sign, who gives a shit. You cannot possibly compare it to iconic structures like the Bow and the CN Tower.

Yes, I'd definitely consider it one of Canada's most iconic along with CN, although I'm not sure if I'd place the Bow at that level yet. We'll revisit that in a decade perhaps.

The only thing that really bothers me about it is the concrete bunker podium.

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by Acajack

What makes you say that? Maybe it is something I can't see but I don't view skyline-driven tourism as being that big a deal. At least not for this type of city. Nor do I see the presence of the brutalist Complexe G (Marie-Guyart) as a drain on Quebec City tourism.

It definitely matters, hard to market a city without good visuals. Brutalism can be done right, occasionally, but in general Canada does brutalism very very poorly. Those towers are an atrocity on an otherwise unique and elegant skyline and building stock and from some angles (most angles) overpower the effect of the key pieces of that skyline. Anyway, this is just my opinion, it seems there are more than a few people on this forum who actually like that sort of brutalist architecture, people like me feel like gagging every time I see that sort of thing. Modern is cool, ancient/historic is lovely, brutalist is infuriatingly ugly.

[middeljohn]

1. Toronto
2. Calgary
3. Vancouver
4. Montreal
5. Edmonton
6. Winnipeg
7. Hamilton
8. Quebec City
9. Regina
10. Niagara Falls

[The_Architect]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Yes, I'd definitely consider it one of Canada's most iconic along with CN, although I'm not sure if I'd place the Bow at that level yet. We'll revisit that in a decade perhaps.

The only thing that really bothers me about it is the concrete bunker podium.

Literally zero people who aren't Canadian (and even then barely anyone outside of Montreal) would ever recognize PVM. It's one of the most nondescript office towers out there.

You don't see me calling Exchange Tower iconic.

[Martin Mtl]

It might need a good wash, but I don't see anything ugly in this image.


Source

[The_Architect]

Lol. It's a pretty generic International Style tower.

[Nouvellecosse]

You may view it as generic since so many towers have sprouted up in the international style after this one was completed. But it's the copy cats that are diminished by the original, not the other way around.

Originally Posted by The_Architect

Literally zero people who aren't Canadian (and even then barely anyone outside of Montreal) would ever recognize PVM. It's one of the most nondescript office towers out there.

You don't see me calling Exchange Tower iconic.

You're confusing iconic with famous. When I say iconic, I mean possessing the uniqueness or characteristics befitting an icon, not that it's become famous for them.

Although for architectural experts, I'm sure PVM is fairly well known, certainly more than within the general public as things can become mainstream famous without actually being in any way deserving.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Aside from it's shape? That's like saying aside from it's shape there's really nothing unique about the Bow, or aside from it's height, there's really nothing unique about the CN tower.

How many defining characteristics does one building need?

Materials / colours would be one, innovative design (like the Atrium in the Bow that helps HVAC circulate), some sort of lighting feature... there's lots that can be done. I get that this building is an international style building where less is more, but now that buildings are a little flashier it can make international buildings look boring.

[Nouvellecosse]

PVM was every bit as innovative in its day though. You have to look at architecture in context. Which is why I said I'd need to assess it after at least a good decade, because the "shiny and new" factor can be very distorting.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

Especially considering that PVM is a classic exemple of International Style, where less is more. The shape becomes the statement.

Surprisingly though, PVM is a building that changes a lot depending on the angle, the light of the day or the season and where you are when looking at it. When I drive on Sherbrooke street east/west and it appears at the end of the curve after Notre-Dame hospital, it's a vision. It looks twice as big as it really is and it's just epic. Also, at night, with the light, it's also epic ands romantic. I genuinely don't understand how one can find it just ok, never mind ugly, but I guess it's a building that grows on you, it's iconic, and maybe you have to live in Montreal to be able to appreciate all this. My 2 cents.

For me, maybe it's that I'm used to buildings that are a little more flashy. The 2 cities I spend a lot of time in with highrises is Calgary and Vancouver, and all the biggest buildings were meant as more of a Statement. 1250 RL is my favourite in Montreal, just demands more attention that PVM.

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

PVM was every bit as innovative in its day though. You have to look at architecture in context. Which is why I said I'd need to assess it after at least a good decade, because the "shiny and new" factor can be very distorting.

I get that, still doesn't make it look better in my eyes though.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

It definitely matters, hard to market a city without good visuals. Brutalism can be done right, occasionally, but in general Canada does brutalism very very poorly. Those towers are an atrocity on an otherwise unique and elegant skyline and building stock and from some angles (most angles) overpower the effect of the key pieces of that skyline. Anyway, this is just my opinion, it seems there are more than a few people on this forum who actually like that sort of brutalist architecture, people like me feel like gagging every time I see that sort of thing. Modern is cool, ancient/historic is lovely, brutalist is infuriatingly ugly.

Agreed, although I there is the odd brutalist/international structure I like. Toronto City Hall and Habitat 67 to name a few. But generally I see 60s/70s era concrete towers as butt ugly.

[SignalHillHiker]

Toronto City Hall is brutalist? Oh wow, there is one I like. Habitat isn't that bad either.

Overall, though, yeah - tend to hate brutalist and international.

[vanatox]

Originally Posted by The_Architect

^ Yeah that just backs up my opinion. There's nothing special about it. It's essentially shoving 4 mediocre 6's office buildings into one spot. It's chunky and plain. I really don't get the appeal.

I guarantee if it was in Toronto nobody would say anything about it (probably would call it ugly actually).

Have you ever thought about changing your username... The_Architect... not very appropriate.

Anyway, I have never been a big fan myself about PVM but it is really a masterpiece from the early sixties.

[ssiguy]

A building is more than just walls and designs but also what it represents. PVM is a classic as it was a storey of the great city building of the city in the 1960s and it evolving into one of the world's great cities. It is, without a doubt, the most recognizable office tower in the country. As soon as you see it you automatically think of Montreal.

Remember when the Eiffel Tower was built for the Paris World Fair, Parisians were aghast at what an ugly structure it was. It was viewed as nothing more than a bung of steel rods stuck together. The people wanted it torn down immediately after the fair as they didn't want their great city to be associated with such a monstrocity. Within just 30 years it went from being a ugly chunk of metal to an iconic tower and architectural wonder.

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by The_Architect

Literally zero people who aren't Canadian (and even then barely anyone outside of Montreal) would ever recognize PVM. It's one of the most nondescript office towers out there.

You don't see me calling Exchange Tower iconic.

Seriously, is there any building in Canada that could be called iconic to non-canadians apart from the CN Tower?