Hideous City of London

I think skyscrapers are just not mean to be built on irregular parcels

I think skyscrapers are meant to be surrounded by gardens and regular boulevards.

[quote] look so bad?

These ugly, gimmick-shaped building are confined to the financial district in the east end.

I think London realised their mistake back in 1959 when the Shell Building was built. It was too close the important vistas of the Houses Of Parliament. It tried to remediate its ugliness by allowing that touristy Ferris Wheel to party obscure the dimoninanceby of this Sub-Miesian block.

This video gets interesting around the 5 minute mark

What is the big egg shaped building in the left corner?

I hope Le Corbusier is getting his ass kicked 24/7 in Ditch 11 of the Malebolge of Hell, the run-down brutalist ditch filled to the brim with flimflam starchitects

r5 Why that's The Gherkin.

All the worst of Dubai and Shanghai plonked down with no apparent consideration to scale, relationship with other buildings or the impact on the skyline.

Very Sydney-like shapes.

We'll take care of the problem.

The British cannot do skyscrapers. I wish they'd stop trying. Just build some more fake Ye Olde Tudor buildings. They're no good either, but at least we wouldn't have to hear all the fucking whining.

Thank God for all the beautiful parks.

Trying to shove modernity up the ass of a classic city looks like that. I guess that explains the giant butt plug.

R13, plenty of classic cites have great Modernism. The British hate Modernism and are condemned to the worst possible version of it.

[quote] I hope Le Corbusier is getting his ass kicked

R6 You need to specify whether you mean Early Corbusier or Late Corbusier. He changed a lot over 40 years.

The colours in OP's image make the agglomeration look yet worse - like loud ugly people over-dressed for a night out.

I happened to see this cluster a few weeks ago from the South Bank - the very grey day lessened the charmless impact only slightly.

It struck me as a deliberately exaggerated collage of futurism devised by a conservative a generation ago to warn off modernism. Sadly though it's all too real.

Hideous.

We have some of these stupid things in NYC, too. a couple are colorfully lit with moving displays at night. It’s like the Vegas strip in the skyline.

Do these abominations light up, too?

I hate the monotony of Manhattan’s skyscrapers. There are, of course, some great buildings. But there’s an awful lot of boring architecture.

London’s recent skyscrapers, by contrast, are much more interesting. They are not Grampa’s aesthetic, though.

I can see how that might be jarring to some.

I actually appreciate these attempts. They're not perfect. But at least they were trying. What I cannot stand is the hundredth version of the same glass and steel building that look the same in every f***ing city of the globe. I would prefer architecture to be more region specific.

But better architecture and city planning will always remain just a dream. There will always be a need for quick and cheap buildings to meet some important and immediate needs. Think public housing or basic commercial buildings. Most buildings are not developed to be the city's family jewel.

Question: What city does city planning best in your opinion?

Worst - Toronto

Best - Chicago

This is my opinion, based solely on how the city center appears as a whole.

I think It's one of the most interesting skylines that exist. Grumpy Brits hate everything new.

Well lots of horrific stuff is “interesting” isn’t it?

Not to me

I love the Gherkin!

R2 Cities only work because of streets, not in spite of them.

There's a reason why Paris has one skyscraper and one alone and the Parisians loathe it.

Blame the pension fund landowners, corporate leaseholders and the power of the City of London's financial institutions for the monstrosities.

Sir Christopher Wren is rotating in his grave as we speak.

Parisians hate the Tour Maine-Montparnasse because it's rubbish - it's generally considered one of the ugliest buildings in Europe. At least London's skyscrapers are quirky, interesting and distinctive. You couldn’t mistake that skyline for anywhere else. The higgledy-piggledy look works.

Best views in Paris are from the Tour Montparnasse... because it's the only place where you can't see the Tour Montparnasse.

The towers look like tarted up slags. Appropriate.

British modern architecture is full of schoolboy contrarianism and class-consciousness, just like everything else the British do. It's a classic case of cutting off the nose to spite the face.

"Do the frogs do it? Do the yanks do it? Do the kikes do it? Then we're not going to do it!"

Whoever approved building shaped like a phone handset is brainless.

Gee, whoever thought that a giant curved glass surface would operate as a huge lens and fry everything in in sight when the sun hits it.

R18, London's skyscrapers don't come anywhere close to New York's best, which are far more prevalent.

Paris is starting to approve higher building all over Paris. And of course there is the tower financial district, La Défense, bordering the official boundary of Paris.

Tour Triangle coming soon.

This vantage is utterly appalling

20 Fenchurch Street (The Walkie Talkie) is my "Ugliest Building Anywhere."

It's certainly the walkie talkie which sets the seal on the unappealing cluster. In fact the three rectilinear buildings in the centre are just about tolerable, as is the gherkin. But the walkie talkie drags all in its orbit right down - guilty by association. Its comprehensive wrongness reminds me of Trump, and sadly it'll last much longer.

The New York architect who designed the walkie talkie died last month. It's a shame he couldn't take that building with him.

Isn't it because we don't really 'do' skyscrapers in the UK? Or rather, historically, we never have done.

Ok. What's for luch?

We call it The Lady Shaver, R37.