^ Yes, indeed.
It is three-quarters of a masterpiece. If not for the developer, I'm sure it would have been four quarters.
Would you prefer zero quarters?
You could also say that, if not for the developer, there would be none of those fat boxes.
The same question would apply: "Would you prefer no jobs?"
I can't regard the Beekman building as 3/4 of a masterpiece. The flaw diminishes the whole. I can regard it as a fine building, maybe the best we can expect under the circumstances.
It will be interesting to see how the final product is critiqued.
Especially since you can't see much of the north side of this building from uptown.
God, the Met Life/ Pan Am building is the ugliest, most unwelcome addition to the Midtown skyline, ever.
I remember Park Ave from before that gravestone went up, and I have loathed it since.
I suppose in a different context it would be an attractive thing, like on 6th Ave or in the Financial District, but WHERE it is and what it did to the genteel scale of Park makes it an abomination --and it is the FIRST building I would vote for if there was a "Tear Down Any Manhattan Skyscraper" contest.
I'd vote for it a thousand times, like a cheating weasel voting on "American Idol".
And the people who decided that Penn Station had to go and a cheezy, uninspired superblock had to take its place should have been taken out and whipped like a rented mule. Seventh Ave had some CLASS around the Fashion District back in the day-- sharply defined by Penn Station, a classic Roman Palace amid the skyscrapers.
--Until the 1960's and the "Less is More" style of architecture that we have had to endure ever since took over the once-grand square-block spread of the Station.
Today's boring box has endured almost as long as Penn Station did, and I'd vote it second in the "Tear Down ..." contest.
That was a GREAT series of photos. It shows that even in a short span of time, Manhattan is continuously evolving and changing. It is a very interesting metamorphosis; it always has been and it will go on as long as there is a New York...
Last edited by Hof; July 17th, 2011 at 04:22 PM.
Re: Gehry's Beekman south side ...
Not to worry. When the Chang / McSam thing goes up across the street it will totally eclipse that big flat stainless wall (which is actually looking pretty cool and contrasts well with the other rippling facades).
^ Glad to hear it.
If not from Uptown, then where?Originally Posted by stache
bottom pic from RFCgraphics.com
Last edited by RandySavage; September 1st, 2009 at 08:31 PM.
^ More is less.
^in this as well:
bottom pic from RFCgraphics.com
present day pics from RFCgraphics.com
New York, You've Changed: Ghostbusters, Part One
Nick Carr
Today marks the first installment of "New York, You've Changed," a new Scouting NY series in which the New York featured in movies is compared with the city of today. This is not meant to be the usual list of shooting locations and addresses to visit next time you tour the city. Instead, this is a full shot-by-shot dissection to see what New York once was and what it has become, for better or worse. I've tried to recreate the angles and framing as best as possible, and have presented the shots (more or less) in the order they appear in the film. Please leave feedback!
Though there are many movies I'm excited to cover for "New York, You've Changed," I had no choice but to start with the movie that first introduced me to New York City ...
I first saw Ghostbusters when I was about 8 years old and instantly fell in love with it. I watched it over and over, to the point where I could recite the entire film. Watching guys trapping ghosts with backpack nuclear accelerators was like a child's fantasy come to life, and I defy you to find a kid of the 1980s who will not confirm the magic Ghostbusters carried in their youth.
I had never been to New York City at the time, but the film made me desperately want to go. The public library, the university, the firehouse, Dana's apartment building ... New York seemed completely different from Boston, the only city I knew as a kid. Unfortunately, I only set first set foot in the city in 2000, and by then, New York was a completely different place.
Ghostbusters was shot in New York over a four week period beginning in October 1983, then returned to L.A. for months of soundstage photography. Yet in those short four weeks, director Ivan Reitman and team managed to capture enough of the city to make Ghostbusters an iconic "New York" movie. The New York of 1983 is very different from the post-Giuliani city of today -- it feels dangerous, gritty, dirty, tough, angry, and exciting. It seems like a struggle just to cross the street. How much has New York changed a quarter of a century later? Let's have a look...The film opens at the New York Public Library, which has a ghost residing in its stacks. The first image of the film cranes to one of the NYPL's lions ...
... which seems to be thankfully unchanged all these years later. One of Reitman's goals in shooting was to focus on New York statuary, and it seems appropriate to start off the film with one of the city's most iconic symbols.
At the time of shooting, the Ghostbusters crew was disappointed to find that the library was going through restoration work, and had to shoot tight to avoid showing too much scaffolding. Nevertheless, this shot reveals the extent of the work ...
Today, the library is yet again under restoration -- the top portion is covered in canvas, and the bottom right area is blocked off. While the main reading room was shot on location, the stacks were actually filmed in Los Angeles.
Next up is Columbia University, shown beneath the logo. I'm not sure if it's a matter of color correction, a bad film transfer to DVD, or that New York was simply much smoggier back in the day, but I've never seen the campus look so dingy ...
Today, like the New York Public Library, the campus is essentially the same, although the building on the right in the Ghostbusters picture, Ferris Booth Hall, was demolished in 1996 to create the much larger Alfred Lerner Hall, the current student center. Other than there seeming to be much less smog than in 2009, little has changed, a rarity in New York.
When we first meet the Ghostbusters, they're working out of "Weaver Hall," the "Department of Psychology."
In reality, Weaver Hall is actually Havemeyer Hall, a classroom building primarily dedicated to science and math (in fact, this building has what I consider to be New York's finest lecture hall -- you can see it repeatedly in the Spiderman films; nice to know Peter Parker and Peter Venkman hung out in the same building). In comparing the two pictures, you can see that we've come so far since the 1980's -- we now recycle, and we no longer believe in handicap access! (just kidding, I'm sure there's an alternate entrance somewhere). Here's the full building, located in the north-western portion of the campus:
After getting booted from the university, Peter and Ray have a life-altering conversation on the east side of the campus.
I was shocked to see that Columbia has not installed a plaque on this block announcing that "Bill Murray drank here." If there was one single scene in a film that made me think "drinking is what the cool kids do" as a child, it was this. Other than some noticeable differences in foliage, Columbia continues to look the the same.
As they continue their conversation, you get a reverse view, and again, you can see the difference in student centers. Also note that a gate has been put up, preventing you from going into the area where they have most of their conversation.
After deciding to go into business for themselves, the crew takes a trip to the generically-named "Manhattan City Bank" to take out a mortgage on Ray's childhood home ("Everyone has a third mortgage nowadays"). I can tell from the footage that they were filming across the street from the New York Public Library ...
...but I think the entrance to this building has been completely renovated.
The only clue that this is the correct location is that wall of stone on the left hand side, which seems to match in color to the above photograph. I think the original entrance was more inset.
Finally, the Ghostbusters find their home: Tribeca's iconic Hook & Ladder #8 (also seen in Hitch and Seinfeld).
Note the new glass-curtain building on the right. The building to the left, which was probably considered a dump in 1983, is now the Bubbles Lounge champagne bar. Times have changed. The alley next to the firehouse is used for firefighter parking.
Shortly after Ray proclaims "You've gotta try this pole!", we head uptown to Dana's apartment at 55 Central Park West. Our first shot is of the building towering over the skyline, as seen from Central Park. Compare that to the actual view ...
Dana's building is dead center, but in reality actually seems somewhat squat compared to the surrounding buildings. Of course, the first image is actually a matte painting, in which a very realistic painting is superimposed on actual footage of Central Park. Not only did they give the building a much more menacing appearance, they also blotted out a number of the surrounding buildings. I wrongly assumed the field was Central Park's Great Lawn; it's actually the Sheep Meadow. Stand on the east side under the trees to get the correct view.
This is an aerial photo of the building in 1983 ...
...and a sketch of the addition:
Originally, the filmmakers had been planning to use 1 Fifth Avenue, the first building north of Washington Square Park, for Dana's apartment. Not only is it much taller ...
...it also features a roof that would lend itself naturally to a temple...
...especially compared to the top of 55 Central Park West:
Also, it was perfectly located for an iconic shot of the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man passing by (or perhaps destroying) the Washington Square Park Arch. Unfortunately, the 1 Fifth Ave condo association couldn't come to an agreement on filming, and shooting was moved uptown.
Back at 55 Central Park West, we first see Dana leaving a cab while struggling with groceries.
Notice a difference? While the buildings are very much the same, New York's cabs have certainly changed ...
Dana walks across the street to the entrance of the building, nearly getting hit (if there's any major difference between New York of the 1980's and today, it's that I could stand in the street for a good 30 seconds taking pictures with cars swerving around me without a problem).
I believe that's a new bus stop pole. It also looks like the building might have had central air installed, as the air-conditioning units have been removed. But all-in-all, still very much the same. I love the light-up taxi globe positioned over the entrance:
Louis Tully tries to get into Tavern on the Green! The Ghostbusters montage it up through New York! And more! Part 2 coming Wednesday!-SCOUT
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nick-c..._b_293482.html
I saw these two images in two different threads.
The shadow of the Empire State Building in 1940:
It's an image from a link posted by Merry in the New York in Black and White thread.
Meesalikeu posted this image from this year in the Empire State Building thread:
New York, You've Changed -- Ghostbusters, Part Two
"New York, You've Changed" is a new Scouting NY site feature in which the New York depicted in movies is compared with the city of today. This is not the usual list of shooting locations and addresses to visit next time you tour the city. Instead, this is a full shot-by-shot dissection to see what New York once was and what it has become, for better or worse. I've tried to recreate the angles and framing as best as possible, and have presented the shots (more or less) in the order they appear in the film. This is Part Two to our look at Ghostbusters -- Part One is here. Enjoy!
With this article, we're completing our "New York, You've Changed" look at Ghostbusters. Picking up where we left off, Egon, Ray, and Peter have been kicked out of Columbia and have since purchased a Tribeca firehouse to base their fledgling ghostbusting business in.
In this scene, Ray drives up in what will soon become the iconic "Ectomobile" -- not a hearse, as some believe, but actually an old ambulance (to be specific, a 1959 Cadillac Miller-Meteor limo-style endloader combination car [ambulance conversion]). If you look in the background, you get a brief glimpse of the neighborhood surrounding the firehouse on North Moore Street.
You get a better view later in the film, when Peter arrives to find EPA officer Walter Peck attempting to shut down the powergrid. As you can see in both pictures, a lot has changed, primarily the complete gutting of what I think was the "Vera Electronics Company," now the Cercle Rouge Brasserie. Lots of building painting changes to boot. Also, North Moore Street has lost meter parking but has gained some foliage.
Also, note the squat brick building on the corner, which you can see in this aerial view when the storage facility blows.
This brick building was purchased by a wealthy family, who recently built a five story home on top of it (yep, that's a single family house). Because the brick building is landmarked, they had to integrate it into their design. Ha, I'd sort of rather live in the firehouse, but then, I'm nuts.
As Peter listens to Ray's endless list of car repairs, we get a glimpse across Hudson Street, which has completely changed (the restaurant on the corner is now Walkers). Also note that the "ENTRANCE AROUND CORNER" sign on the firehouse still exists:
After meeting Dana Barrett, the Ghostbusters complete their first successful bust at the Sedgewick Hotel. Where is its New York counterpart? You'll have to go to California for that one -- they filmed at Los Angeles' Millennium Biltmore Hotel.
We next get a montage taking us through their rapid successes at busting ghosts, and I'm going to need a little help identifying this first location. Anyone recognize it? It feels very familiar to me, but I just can't place it. I think that sign says "Mens Wear" on the right, though I doubt that helps. Also, the bearded guy looking into the camera is actually an actor.
The next part of the montage appears to have been shot around the Little Italy/Chinatown neighborhood. I was excited to go searching for some of the more obscure shots, but was ultimately thwarted by the San Gennaro festival (for non-New Yorkers, thousands of people descend on Little Italy for an enormous street fair, making photography, walking, even breathing nearly impossible). I'm planning on returning to the area after the festival is over sometime this November. We get a shot of the Ectomobile passing by the infamous Umberto's ...
Next, we see Peter and Ray in Chinatown. I really feel there's enough clues in this picture to locate this (the metal railing, the yellow sign, etc.) and for shooting purposes, I bet it's very close to Umberto's.
This next shot of Egon with a smoking trap had me wondering, until I noticed both a "Luna Restaurant" and a "PIZZA" sign in the background. Granted, this could be anywhere in New York (there are several "Luna" establishments in the city), but if they were doing montage shots in Little Italy, it seems to be a safe bet that this was there.
It would also make perfect sense to find an apartment building with a lower level like this in the neighborhood. If anyone knows differently, please let me know!
Here, we see the Ectomobile cruise past St. Patrick's and Saks Fifth Ave. In many of these shots, it's actually Dan Aykroyd driving the car, even though you can't see him. Looks like the awnings are gone. Also, for reasons unknown, we now need to put up with that incredibly frustrating sidewalk barrier:
Finally, we see the Ghostbusters running up Rockefeller Center. Apparently, they had no permission to shoot there, and you can actually see a security guy (maybe the man in white on the left?) running after them in the shot.
After the montage, Peter chats with Dana about Zuul and Gozer in Lincoln Center. The fountain was recently replaced, to the dismay of preservationists, with a modern version that will entertain tourists with computer-controlled water displays.
Bad things quickly begin happening in Dana's apartment building. For the life of me, I can't find this location in Central Park. It's obviously faked -- Dana's apartment is superimposed where it simply doesn't exist. But I can't seem to find this curve. Any guesses? The best I could come up with is the entrance at 72nd Street, which doesn't feel totally right.
With a terror dog right behind him, Louis Tully flees to Central Park and desperately tries to get into Tavern on the Green via the patio (I believe the statue was a prop).
Inside, a birthday party is in full swing (trivia -- the birthday girl is Debbie Gibson). I located the correct side of the patio by that tree, which is hidden behind the hanging flowers in the below picture.
Louis runs to the left and desperately tries the door, which is locked (FYI -- for anyone running from terror dogs, the door is still locked):
Finally, in what has to be one of the more sympathy-inducing scenes in modern cinema, Louis backs against a window -- it's the second one to the right of the tree trunk.
Shortly after, Walter Peck shuts down the protection grid and the containment unit blows. As you watch the enormous explosion blow out of the Ghostbusters roof, you could be forgiven for not noticing the MATERA CANVAS ad on the building to the left, which is still there today:
The ad advertises a store at 5 Lispenard Street, which was in business as recently as 1990, having been around since 1907 (more info in this New York Times article).
During the commotion, Louis manages to escape -- anyone know what street this?
A quick tidbit you might have missed -- in this shot, you can see a "STAY PUFT MARSHMALLOWS" wall ad on the building to the left (wouldn't that be a great addition to the now otherwise ugly wall?).
As ghosts escape, we see one fly out of a subway station, which can be found at the City Hall RW train entrance on Broadway west of City Hall (the newsstand seems to have shifted south a block):
Next, a commuter gets in a cab with a corpse. Any idea what avenue this is?
I've had this cab driver before:
The cab takes off, sending traffic swerving out of its path. This might give a second clue to the location of the scene:
For a brief moment, we get a shot of Louis crossing the street as he makes his way to Dana's apartment. What I find interesting about this shot is an awning that reads "WIENERWALD - Austrian Restaurant." I had never heard of a WienerWald before -- apparently, it was the largest fast food restaurant in Europe during the 1970's, and had attempted to expand to America. Now, there are only 63 locations left in Germany and Austria.
Slimer makes another appearance, this time in a hot dog vendor's cart outside of the McGraw-Hill building at Rockefeller Center:
Dana sends a signal to Louis, who hears it in Times Square. This is the weirdest shot -- it's like the went out of their way to hide the fact that it's Times Square. I only recognized it for the TKTS booth (boy has that changed) and the George Cohan statue. Odd that they would shoot in the heart of Manhattan and not show the surrounding area (methinks they got this shot on the fly).
After a meeting with the mayor at City Hall ...
...the boys in gray peel out and head uptown...
... vowing to "run some red lights."
Much of the destruction that occurs to the street in front of Dana's building was actually shot on a sound stage in California with a full two-story replica of the apartment's facade (if you pay close attention, it's very clear when they're on the set):
Finally, the one and only Stay Puft Marshmallow Man makes an appearance in Columbus Circle. Aw, I miss the old Museum of Arts & Design building, even if it was one of the ugliest buildings in the city (for years, I thought it was some sort of parking garage). Note the sliver of an old Marlboro Cigarettes ad on the right:
As terrified New Yorkers flee, they have no idea that the store on the corner will one day be a FedEx Kinkos:
As Stay Puft approaches the building, you can see just how drastic the building addition is:
I had to post this great shot -- I never noticed that two great villains, Walter Peck and Stay Puft, appear in one brief shot.
Finally, years later, the marshmallow has been cleaned up and New York is basically back to normal.
As it turns out, most of the changes between the New York in Ghostbusters and the New York of 2009 are pretty small, due to the fact that the movie was mostly shot in locations where change is not allowed (the New York Public Library, Columbia, Rockefeller Center, etc.). In my mind, it's a very good thing that these New York treasures are still standing strong more than 25 years later.
With the recent success of 80's nostalgia reboots (G.I. Joe, Transformers, etc.), there's been renewed talk about a Ghostbusters 3. A script was commissioned by Sony Pictures, with writing duties handed to Gene Stupnitsky and Lee Eisenberg, the writers of Year One.
The writers of Year One. Are you ****ing kidding me?
Look, I'd kill to see the Ghostbusters hit the streets of New York for one last fight against the paranormal, but when I say the Ghostbusters, I don't mean a new crop of comedic actors. Nothing makes me fear for the worst more than thinking of Ben Stiller, Jack Black, Seth Rogan, or Paul Rudd hefting on a proton pack (in his defense, Seth Rogan is on record as saying he will not be the guy to ruin Ghostbusters). I've heard industry-types say that there's no way Murray, Aykroyd, or Ramis could support a tentpole movie like Ghostbusters 3.
Bullshit. If Harrison Ford can pack 'em in at 67 for a subpar Indy IV, there is no question that audiences will turn out in droves to see Ray, Peter, Egon, and Winston save New York one more time.
Anyway, hope you enjoyed! I'm going to try to make this a regular site feature. Next time, we'll move a bit further back in film history.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nick-c...tml?view=print
How much of the economic output of cities is generated by business entities that claim they must have fat floor plates to be able to function? My guess is, in the grand scheme of whole economies, not a lot (or not nearly as much as we'd expect looking at Manhattan). If that is the case, why do we accept the proliferation of expansive floor plates and the arguable destruction of the fine fabric of central cities?
To posit an example, the World Trade Center towers, with huge floor plates, were not wholly occupied by companies that needed their enormous floors, but by much smaller companies that could have been located in almost any structure. Furthermore, oftentimes the companies that need huge floor plates (and build them) will only occupy a dozen or less in an entire high-rise. Without doubt you know this, so I will write no more.
Consequently, the logical and honest questions to pose are these: What is the efficient alternative to titanic office floors; and, how can we better organize our places of work to allow ourselves to become more efficient with our utilization of space?
Having been presented the "would you prefer no jobs?" question before, I have come to view it as a false question in the debate in the appropriate size of high-rise buildings.
By the way, the Ghostbusters posts are fantastic! A pleasure and a good-time to read.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks