There was a private club on or near the top floor of this building called the "Sky Club" to which my Dad belonged to through the company he worked for in NYC. It was elegant and "men only" during lunchtime hours in the 1960s. It was a place to take clients for the "3-martini lunch." In the evenings women were allowed in after 4 pm. I have fond memories of lunches there during the time I worked in the city. I don't know when the Sky Club closed; it was still open when Dad's membership ended upon his retirement in 1979.
I worked in this building as a security guard.HATED the job, but loved the building. But like a lot of other native New Yorkers, I prefer to remember it as the Pan Am building.
One of my favorite buildings in New York. As a kid with my dad driving from Brooklyn going up the FDR on our way to my aunt’s house in the Bx I always loved looking at it. Your negative comments I’ve never heard anyone say. It is Iconic.
I think those of us who came after the building's construction can't really hate it, precisely for the reasons you mentioned. The criticism was harsh back in its day, but it's mostly faded with time. And speaking of memories with your dad... well, that makes me think of how those memories can make even a graffiti-covered wall seem beautiful. I'm not kidding! I remember, like it was yesterday, almost falling asleep in the backseat of the car, watching the streetlights go by. That memory still brings me a sense of peace that few things can replicate. I know this might seem out of the blue, but there's this song called "Beirut" by a fantastic Franco-Lebanese trumpet player named Ibrahim Maalouf. I don't know why, but it always takes me back to those moments.
You misunderstood my comment. I did not equate it as a memory shared with my dad although there were plenty. That was just the way we got to the Bx. If I had been on a stagecoach going up the FDR Drive it still would have been an iconic building along side the Chrysler and Empire State.
As a 90s kid... It is iconic to NYC even if it's ugly... as I've seen this building numerous times in NYC tv shows and GTA 4. It's good to see 53W53 and the glassy pencil thin skyscrapers offset the ugly brutalist buildings and boxes.
Less 'a middle finger to the skyline' and more 'looming over Grand Central to establish that the Jet Age will destroy the Rail Age.' Besides, the New York Central (now Helmsley) Building had already been straddling Park Avenue for more than 30 years before construction of the Pan Am began. It's hyperbole to say that this 1962 international style building was worse than the Seagrams Building of 1959 or Lever House of 1952. All of them are distinctive. Each has its own style, unlike the 'Mies Van Der' Row of boxes on 6th Avenue.
You're absolutely right, the NY Central Building was already there. But it wasn't just a massive concrete wall, was it? It had a certain elegance, a playfulness with its form that didn't obliterate the skyline. And the ornamentation? Just enough to be interesting, not enough to be gaudy. Like a perfectly tailored suit, not some over-the-top Christmas tree. Now? People barely even notice it. That damn "wall" stole its thunder. And for the record, I don't hate the Pan Am building itself. If they'd plopped it down somewhere else, maybe I'd even like it. As for the Seagram and Lever House, yeah, they're distinctive alright. But they were pioneers, trendsetters! Pan Am, on the other hand, with its so-called International Style, was just a rehash of tired trends. A copycat, if you will. But hey, you're right. It's all subjective. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that jazz. I'm not claiming to be the ultimate authority on architectural taste. In fact, I love hearing different perspectives. It's refreshing, especially in this crazy world we live in, that people still care about things like this. Gives me hope for humanity, ya know?
As an architect I say, “ F people’s opinions … what matters most is the quality of materials, the functionality and the opinion of those cutting the cheques.”
Yeah, that last part's hard to dispute, it's practically a universal truth. But if the rest were accurate, you'd be getting a degree in engineering, not architecture, right?
I completely disagree with this channel's assessment. The Pan Am building is elegant, modern and immediately recognizable. It makes a strong and unapologetic statement. Much like New York City itself.
I’m gratified to see virtually all the comments here state they love the building and never heard anything against it. I lived in NYC for 55 years and that’s the way I feel also. The whole area around Grand Central Terminal is special and unique and the PanAm/ML building is a part of it. I think it looks great across Park Ave, especially when you’re uptown on Park Ave and look down the avenue towards it. It makes a great statement, like an exclamation point at the of a long sentence.
Its imposing nature is undeniable. And while I believe I would find it more appealing in a different location, there is no disputing matters of taste, especially in architecture. I am pleased that you find it to your liking.
Not a New Yorker, not even American, but I cannot stomach you refering to this skyscraper as the "MetLife" Building. It's the Pan Am Building, now, tomorrow and forever. The original logo is what aesthetically completed it.
Grand Central trains travel under this building. So it had to be designed such that its support columns didn’t interfere with the train tracks below. There is no lobby at ground lobby. It’s raised up, again because of the trains below. [Elevators need space below their lowest floor.]
For me it will always be the PanAm building regardless of who owns it and what label they put on it. It’s still a beautiful building with unmatched esthetic and as iconic and individual as they come. It’s a symbol of an era of style and class which unfortunately is gone but gladly the building remains as a reminder of what class was and of an airline which was unmatched in class and style.
I like the Pan Am building more than the Seagram building. People seem to fawn over the Seagram building, I’m not saying it’s a bad building, but I like the Pan Am building better.
Naturally, I respect your viewpoint; taste is subjective, and there's no disputing individual preferences. However, regarding the Seagram Building, which may appear commonplace to us now, one must consider it within its historical context. At the time of its construction, nothing bore even a passing resemblance to it. Its impact on the architectural world was so profound that subsequent designs have been, to varying degrees of success, essentially derivative of that pioneering structure. It stands in stark contrast to the Pan Am Building, which, it could be argued, represents the culmination of its particular architectural lineage.
I have always loved the Pan Am Building. Everything about it. Everything you criticize it for, I love. But then again, I don't live in NYC. I only visit. The building is so iconic and recognizable. They should being back the rooftop heliport. It was a defining feature. One tragic accident should not end decades of use.
Lived in NYC 4EVER. NEVER heard anything controversial about it other than when it went from PAN AM to MET LIFE. New Yorkers HATED THAT NAME CHANGE. Still do 😁🇺🇸❤️🤙🏼🙏🏼😎
There was no loss building the Pan Am Building. The view down Park Avenue was only for the rich, so I don’t understand why people complain about the loss of the view. It wasn’t there for the rest of us to enjoy . . .
I've walked through the lobby dozens of times when departing Grand Central. The site is problematic. The building is shoe-horned into a very cramped site with no real room to breathe. It always seems dark around there.
You're not wrong, sunshine's a rare commodity around there. Just like affordable dining, especially if you're thinking about that Capital Grille on 45th. But who knows, maybe they have a 'sun-dried tomato' special that justifies the price.
A third is empty and the the view up and down Park Ave was destroyed. I was on a helicopter to Idlewild when the building first opened.. what BS the narration is.."Don't have an opinion was the message.
Now that I know it was the Pan American building, it wasn't a middle finger to urban planning, but a way to take a crap on top of the most beautiful and grandest piece of train infrastructure in the country. I wouldn't be surprised if when all of the domestic airlines finally merge into one, that they purchase the building and put their logo on this building using Grand Central Terminal as their podium. The City and State of New York would do us all a favor and put in a clause that if they ever wanted to renovate, or rebuild another building on top, that it would have to be removed leaving Grand Central Terminal as it was before the building metastasized onto the terminal.
This building has a different look and lines than many of the glass and steel structures that were going up in NYC at the time. Now if you used this review on the building that replaced the Singer Tower I would agree with you 100%!!
I wish when people who do these videos would stop being so 2 sided to please viewers to get subscribers rather than saying: "I love the building...., but...., I hate the building 🤔?" It would not have been such a mass monster (the architect's intentions not to have another NY square building), if they just designed the Pan Am Building taller and slimmer. Still it turned out to be one of Manhattan's most recognizable skyscrapers.
You nailed it - too many channels are scared to get their feet wet. But I'm tellin' ya, on this one, I was for real. That damn building... I got a real love-hate thing goin' on with it. But hey, that ain't my usual M.O., and you'll see in the next video, I won't be pullin' any punches.
Whenever I encounter an evocation of that particular place and time, it’s chiefly the memory of Don Draper that is blocking my view. He was a fictional composite and yet he looms large as a reliable exemplar of that époque. I feels like a timely reminder of the subjective manner in which we perceive or recount history and past events. Just sayin…
Hmm, I'm not familiar with a MetLife Building on 31st. Are you sure about the address? The famous one is at 200 Park Avenue. Could you be thinking of another building?
My dad worked on Park Avenue, and while I don't have a real connection to it, I think it looks nice as a backdrop to the more ornate Helmsley Building, and imposing from the South towards Grand Central. I appreciate it's massive size compared to those toothpicks that line the southern streets of Central Park of the 50's.
This building? Ah, it's a real love-hate thing, ya know? Maybe it's just that I ain't used to it yet, but I gotta say, it's growin' on me. Not totally sold, but definitely not as much of an eyesore as it used to be. And don't even get me started on those other buildings you mentioned - this one blows those outta the water! Fuggedaboutit, it's way better than anything they're throwin' up on Billionaire's Row these days.
Huh lmao your enthusiasm was amazing 😂 However I’d love to say Freedom Tower aka 1wtc is THE Giant middle finger to itself and its own People/Nation Ironically and those who think otherwise are part of the problem The Pan Am building aka Met Life instantly caught my attention in Spider-Man2 ps2 as it was one of the Tallest yet Widest building in the game and now has rich history which I admire.”, and what you said only made me think more of the Legendary Twin Towers as they truly ARE one of the greatest ambitious buildings in human history which unfortunately idiots are STILL glad they’re gone
You complain about a building straddling Park Ave., but you say nothing about the train tracks that cover the entire length of Park Ave. between 97th st and 132nd st?
But let's be real, what is there to even say about that... thing? I mean, with what they're charging for a shoebox apartment in Morningside Heights, you'd figure burying those tracks would be a given.
The terrain for that is not feasible… and the elevated rail segment you’re referring to is the 1 train line on BROADWAY… which is Park Avenue’s counterpart on the UWS. The slope is too steep for subway trains to move uphill and would require an elimination of the 116th Columbia University and the 137th City College stations to accommodate the gradual inclines needed.
Forgive me, Sundays are clearly not my best day for discourse. The mention of "tracks" just set me off - a sore spot, you see. But, if I may humbly inquire, as you seem quite knowledgeable on the subject, is the cost of burying those stations truly so astronomical, given the potential increase in value in such a thriving neighborhood?
@@xivinrah No I'm talking about the Metro North tracks that run below Park Ave and emerge at 97th st to run elevated. Back when the line was constructed through Harlem it wasn't cost effective to continue the tunnel.
The Helmsley Building? An exquisite structure, indeed. Its mere presence serves as a primary justification for one's antipathy towards the Pan Am Building - or, more precisely, its unfortunate placement.
i walk out of my house here on Park and look up and still enjoy the PAN AM BLDG. If the people dont recognize the name , I know the are not real New Yorkers. "transplants"
Forever the Pan Am. But finding a New Yorker who likes it between here and 125th? Fuggedaboutit. So, congrats on marching to the beat of your own drum, I suppose.
What a useless video. Absolutely no content, no history of the site or what was there before or what the view was like, no context about Grand Central or the plan that would have put another skyscraper right on top of it... just a bunch of empty platitudes set to telephone hold music with an assortment of video clips that illustrate nothing. Thanks for wasting my time, Arthur.
Oh, please, no thanks necessary. You should be thanking yourself. On videos like this, cobbled together with a couple of old images and some half-baked commentary, it's constructive comments like yours that actually make it worthwhile.
There was a private club on or near the top floor of this building called the "Sky Club" to which my Dad belonged to through the company he worked for in NYC. It was elegant and "men only" during lunchtime hours in the 1960s. It was a place to take clients for the "3-martini lunch." In the evenings women were allowed in after 4 pm. I have fond memories of lunches there during the time I worked in the city. I don't know when the Sky Club closed; it was still open when Dad's membership ended upon his retirement in 1979.
I worked in this building as a security guard.HATED the job, but loved the building. But like a lot of other native New Yorkers, I prefer to remember it as the Pan Am building.
Unpopular opinion: I've always loved this building.
I love this building - mostly nostalgic for my childhood.
Same!
Same!
Me too even if it's ugly. It's just iconic to NYC
I used to get my hair cut on the second floor in the 80s. My Dad's barber, that was an oooold school haircut. I can still smell the Brill Cream.
One of my favorite buildings in New York. As a kid with my dad driving from Brooklyn going up the FDR on our way to my aunt’s house in the Bx I always loved looking at it. Your negative comments I’ve never heard anyone say. It is Iconic.
I think those of us who came after the building's construction can't really hate it, precisely for the reasons you mentioned. The criticism was harsh back in its day, but it's mostly faded with time.
And speaking of memories with your dad... well, that makes me think of how those memories can make even a graffiti-covered wall seem beautiful. I'm not kidding! I remember, like it was yesterday, almost falling asleep in the backseat of the car, watching the streetlights go by. That memory still brings me a sense of peace that few things can replicate.
I know this might seem out of the blue, but there's this song called "Beirut" by a fantastic Franco-Lebanese trumpet player named Ibrahim Maalouf. I don't know why, but it always takes me back to those moments.
You misunderstood my comment. I did not equate it as a memory shared with my dad although there were plenty. That was just the way we got to the Bx. If I had been on a stagecoach going up the FDR Drive it still would have been an iconic building along side the Chrysler and Empire State.
I agree! This video and sarcasm..... made for reform school inmates
As a 90s kid... It is iconic to NYC even if it's ugly... as I've seen this building numerous times in NYC tv shows and GTA 4. It's good to see 53W53 and the glassy pencil thin skyscrapers offset the ugly brutalist buildings and boxes.
This building is ICONIC!
Not like these new buildings which are popping up up to steal your attention..
I like the Pan Am Building more than the Twin Towers. Went through both in different parts of my career.
Less 'a middle finger to the skyline' and more 'looming over Grand Central to establish that the Jet Age will destroy the Rail Age.'
Besides, the New York Central (now Helmsley) Building had already been straddling Park Avenue for more than 30 years before construction of the Pan Am began.
It's hyperbole to say that this 1962 international style building was worse than the Seagrams Building of 1959 or Lever House of 1952. All of them are distinctive. Each has its own style, unlike the 'Mies Van Der' Row of boxes on 6th Avenue.
You're absolutely right, the NY Central Building was already there. But it wasn't just a massive concrete wall, was it? It had a certain elegance, a playfulness with its form that didn't obliterate the skyline. And the ornamentation? Just enough to be interesting, not enough to be gaudy. Like a perfectly tailored suit, not some over-the-top Christmas tree. Now? People barely even notice it. That damn "wall" stole its thunder.
And for the record, I don't hate the Pan Am building itself. If they'd plopped it down somewhere else, maybe I'd even like it.
As for the Seagram and Lever House, yeah, they're distinctive alright. But they were pioneers, trendsetters! Pan Am, on the other hand, with its so-called International Style, was just a rehash of tired trends. A copycat, if you will.
But hey, you're right. It's all subjective. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that jazz. I'm not claiming to be the ultimate authority on architectural taste. In fact, I love hearing different perspectives. It's refreshing, especially in this crazy world we live in, that people still care about things like this. Gives me hope for humanity, ya know?
I don't mind this building at all. It is certainly no blight when compared to all those "pencil" nightmares that are popping up everywhere.
It destroyed the view of park Ave.
As an architect I say, “ F people’s opinions … what matters most is the quality of materials, the functionality and the opinion of those cutting the cheques.”
Yeah, that last part's hard to dispute, it's practically a universal truth. But if the rest were accurate, you'd be getting a degree in engineering, not architecture, right?
I completely disagree with this channel's assessment. The Pan Am building is elegant, modern and immediately recognizable. It makes a strong and unapologetic statement. Much like New York City itself.
I’m gratified to see virtually all the comments here state they love the building and never heard anything against it. I lived in NYC for 55 years and that’s the way I feel also. The whole area around Grand Central Terminal is special and unique and the PanAm/ML building is a part of it. I think it looks great across Park Ave, especially when you’re uptown on Park Ave and look down the avenue towards it. It makes a great statement, like an exclamation point at the of a long sentence.
Its imposing nature is undeniable. And while I believe I would find it more appealing in a different location, there is no disputing matters of taste, especially in architecture. I am pleased that you find it to your liking.
Not a New Yorker, not even American, but I cannot stomach you refering to this skyscraper as the "MetLife" Building. It's the Pan Am Building, now, tomorrow and forever. The original logo is what aesthetically completed it.
Nobody tell him about Sears Tower.
Grand Central trains travel under this building. So it had to be designed such that its support columns didn’t interfere with the train tracks below. There is no lobby at ground lobby. It’s raised up, again because of the trains below. [Elevators need space below their lowest floor.]
Love the building. I only wish it had kept the PAN AM sign on it instead.
For me it will always be the PanAm building regardless of who owns it and what label they put on it. It’s still a beautiful building with unmatched esthetic and as iconic and individual as they come. It’s a symbol of an era of style and class which unfortunately is gone but gladly the building remains as a reminder of what class was and of an airline which was unmatched in class and style.
I like it. It dwarfs my favorite NYC bldg - 230 Park Avenue!
I like the Pan Am building more than the Seagram building. People seem to fawn over the Seagram building, I’m not saying it’s a bad building, but I like the Pan Am building better.
Naturally, I respect your viewpoint; taste is subjective, and there's no disputing individual preferences. However, regarding the Seagram Building, which may appear commonplace to us now, one must consider it within its historical context. At the time of its construction, nothing bore even a passing resemblance to it. Its impact on the architectural world was so profound that subsequent designs have been, to varying degrees of success, essentially derivative of that pioneering structure. It stands in stark contrast to the Pan Am Building, which, it could be argued, represents the culmination of its particular architectural lineage.
This building saved Grand Central Station, which could easily have gone the way of Pennsylvania Station. Highest and best use, baby.
lol and I thought the Citicorp building was something else with its stilt design.
This is ridiculous, I love this building.
I have always loved the Pan Am Building. Everything about it. Everything you criticize it for, I love. But then again, I don't live in NYC. I only visit. The building is so iconic and recognizable.
They should being back the rooftop heliport. It was a defining feature. One tragic accident should not end decades of use.
Not with the rest, no. I mean, it's growing on me, slowly, but I wouldn't say I like it yet. But that last part? Couldn't agree more.
This is a great building that is recognizable and in a class by itself. It represent a time when progress rein supreme.
I like that it's unique, and easy to spot for navigation. It's not the prettiest building, but imo it adds to the skyline.
Lived in NYC 4EVER. NEVER heard anything controversial about it other than when it went from PAN AM to MET LIFE. New Yorkers HATED THAT NAME CHANGE. Still do 😁🇺🇸❤️🤙🏼🙏🏼😎
There was no loss building the Pan Am Building. The view down Park Avenue was only for the rich, so I don’t understand why people complain about the loss of the view. It wasn’t there for the rest of us to enjoy . . .
I think it's a good decent looking building. It does have a slight resemblance to a man's stick deodorant container. But it is a handsome building.
LOL, whoa, I knew that was familiar! It totally hit me the second I read what you wrote. That's it! You nailed it! So good!
The new bronze colored stepped shaped building near by has awful proportions and makes the Pan Am building look downright sleek!!
Damn, that's big.
Disgusting building. Walter Gropius really had that anti-Midas touch
The Chrysler Building is a ballgown and the Pan Am Building is a leisure suit.
I've walked through the lobby dozens of times when departing Grand Central. The site is problematic. The building is shoe-horned into a very cramped site with no real room to breathe. It always seems dark around there.
You're not wrong, sunshine's a rare commodity around there. Just like affordable dining, especially if you're thinking about that Capital Grille on 45th. But who knows, maybe they have a 'sun-dried tomato' special that justifies the price.
I heard the helicopter landing gear failed and then it rolled over and blades hit the ground
I grew up visiting NYC and found the building exciting and modern. Yeah, and too bad the heliport didn’t work out. Gropius was one of the greats.
A third is empty and the the view up and down Park Ave was destroyed. I was on a helicopter to Idlewild when the building first opened.. what BS the narration is.."Don't have an opinion was the message.
Now that I know it was the Pan American building, it wasn't a middle finger to urban planning, but a way to take a crap on top of the most beautiful and grandest piece of train infrastructure in the country. I wouldn't be surprised if when all of the domestic airlines finally merge into one, that they purchase the building and put their logo on this building using Grand Central Terminal as their podium. The City and State of New York would do us all a favor and put in a clause that if they ever wanted to renovate, or rebuild another building on top, that it would have to be removed leaving Grand Central Terminal as it was before the building metastasized onto the terminal.
This building has a different look and lines than many of the glass and steel structures that were going up in NYC at the time. Now if you used this review on the building that replaced the Singer Tower I would agree with you 100%!!
I wish when people who do these videos would stop being so 2 sided to please viewers to get subscribers rather than saying: "I love the building...., but...., I hate the building 🤔?" It would not have been such a mass monster (the architect's intentions not to have another NY square building), if they just designed the Pan Am Building taller and slimmer. Still it turned out to be one of Manhattan's most recognizable skyscrapers.
You nailed it - too many channels are scared to get their feet wet. But I'm tellin' ya, on this one, I was for real. That damn building... I got a real love-hate thing goin' on with it. But hey, that ain't my usual M.O., and you'll see in the next video, I won't be pullin' any punches.
@3:22, the Pan Am building no longer looks an eyesore and there are worse abominations being foisted on the City by those building pencil thin towers.
Whenever I encounter an evocation of that particular place and time, it’s chiefly the memory of Don Draper that is blocking my view.
He was a fictional composite and yet he looms large as a reliable exemplar of that époque.
I feels like a timely reminder of the subjective manner in which we perceive or recount history and past events.
Just sayin…
I worked in this building and now it is called the MetLife building on the 31th st. We own the whole 31th floor.
Hmm, I'm not familiar with a MetLife Building on 31st. Are you sure about the address? The famous one is at 200 Park Avenue. Could you be thinking of another building?
@ MetLife is 200 park ave. Did you make this video?
My dad worked on Park Avenue, and while I don't have a real connection to it, I think it looks nice as a backdrop to the more ornate Helmsley Building, and imposing from the South towards Grand Central. I appreciate it's massive size compared to those toothpicks that line the southern streets of Central Park of the 50's.
This building? Ah, it's a real love-hate thing, ya know? Maybe it's just that I ain't used to it yet, but I gotta say, it's growin' on me. Not totally sold, but definitely not as much of an eyesore as it used to be. And don't even get me started on those other buildings you mentioned - this one blows those outta the water! Fuggedaboutit, it's way better than anything they're throwin' up on Billionaire's Row these days.
What was there before the Pan Am Building? The other buildings over the tracks, now in front and in back, are much older.
Huh lmao your enthusiasm was amazing 😂
However I’d love to say Freedom Tower aka 1wtc is THE Giant middle finger to itself and its own People/Nation
Ironically and those who think otherwise are part of the problem
The Pan Am building aka Met Life instantly caught my attention in Spider-Man2 ps2 as it was one of the Tallest yet Widest building in the game and now has rich history which I admire.”, and what you said only made me think more of the Legendary Twin Towers as they truly ARE one of the greatest ambitious buildings in human history which unfortunately idiots are STILL glad they’re gone
It’s okay.
I say replace it with something taller, and skinnier!
You complain about a building straddling Park Ave., but you say nothing about the train tracks that cover the entire length of Park Ave. between 97th st and 132nd st?
But let's be real, what is there to even say about that... thing? I mean, with what they're charging for a shoebox apartment in Morningside Heights, you'd figure burying those tracks would be a given.
The terrain for that is not feasible… and the elevated rail segment you’re referring to is the 1 train line on BROADWAY… which is Park Avenue’s counterpart on the UWS. The slope is too steep for subway trains to move uphill and would require an elimination of the 116th Columbia University and the 137th City College stations to accommodate the gradual inclines needed.
Forgive me, Sundays are clearly not my best day for discourse. The mention of "tracks" just set me off - a sore spot, you see. But, if I may humbly inquire, as you seem quite knowledgeable on the subject, is the cost of burying those stations truly so astronomical, given the potential increase in value in such a thriving neighborhood?
@@xivinrah No I'm talking about the Metro North tracks that run below Park Ave and emerge at 97th st to run elevated. Back when the line was constructed through Harlem it wasn't cost effective to continue the tunnel.
What about the Helmsley Building?
The Helmsley Building? An exquisite structure, indeed. Its mere presence serves as a primary justification for one's antipathy towards the Pan Am Building - or, more precisely, its unfortunate placement.
Oh leave it alone. It's need for disaster movie's. 😂😅
I commuted through Grand Central Station for years, and this will always be the Pan Am building. You're a jackass; this building is fabulous.
i walk out of my house here on Park and look up and still enjoy the PAN AM BLDG. If the people dont recognize the name , I know the are not real New Yorkers. "transplants"
Forever the Pan Am. But finding a New Yorker who likes it between here and 125th? Fuggedaboutit. So, congrats on marching to the beat of your own drum, I suppose.
What a useless video. Absolutely no content, no history of the site or what was there before or what the view was like, no context about Grand Central or the plan that would have put another skyscraper right on top of it... just a bunch of empty platitudes set to telephone hold music with an assortment of video clips that illustrate nothing. Thanks for wasting my time, Arthur.
Oh, please, no thanks necessary. You should be thanking yourself. On videos like this, cobbled together with a couple of old images and some half-baked commentary, it's constructive comments like yours that actually make it worthwhile.
AI VOICE! Was this video made for reform school kids? Why the references to profanity? Why the sarcastic remarks?
Ugly. Can we please go back to classical styles?
4:41 - - 1977 🚁🏢
anchovies on pizza
These people, with their anchovies on pizza... they're not just lacking in the taste department, they're completely devoid of a soul, I tell ya!
🏢🏢🏢
It eats up too much NY sky. I hate the damned thing! A Native NYr.