Comments on: Koolhaas’ anti-blob: the Prada Transformer

By: ArtPart .organized | Самая функциональная мельница в Амстердаме | онлайн журнал о мире предметного дизайна и архитектуры

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 09:02:29 +0000

[...] делает проект похожим на портативный павильон Трансформер Прада в Сеуле. #gallery-1 { margin: auto; } #gallery-1 .gallery-item { float: left; margin-top: [...]

By: Multi Mill / NL Architects | ArchDaily

Multi Mill / NL Architects | ArchDaily — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 21:06:33 +0000

[...] function in a particular wing to be ‘switched on’. Perhaps, a new take on Koolhaas’ Prada Transformer?#gallery-1 { margin: auto; } #gallery-1 .gallery-item { float: left; margin-top: 10px; text-align: [...]

By: grahambrentonmckay

grahambrentonmckay — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:15:40 +0000

It really worries me that many people believe anything Remment Koolhaas says.

By: 3 transformers « construcción de palabras

3 transformers « construcción de palabras — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 20:24:30 +0000

[...] más información en este sitio genial [...]

By: cb

cb — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:45:09 +0000

also, the argument that disciplines are converging -

do prada designers really think in an architectural manner when designing dresses?
arguably oma are as image and brand conscious as any fashion house and in some ways probably operate in a similar way, but in observing the total spectrum of architectural practice – has their really been a shift into other territories?

By: cb

cb — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:35:52 +0000

linking different uses and programs is a clever way of building a simple idea inside the tiny minds of those marketing noblifes at prada. it’s such a simple idea, and those geometric figures really form a powerful image.

of course there is no reason why a simple box would not also accommodate all of these uses at much less cost.

it wouldn’t really be a spectacle tho, and it wouldn’t generate anywhere near as much publicity.

oh wait, i think i just realised what this is all about……

By: tom

tom — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 18:22:02 +0000

huraay for OMAA

By: jin

jin — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:49:18 +0000

its a pitty, with so much power the architect could be addresing some of world’s problems, not trying to make a transformer for prada

By: julio

julio — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 19:46:11 +0000

that….it doesn’t have any order…. Is this the future of the architectural work of OMA? the only thing I can think is O…MA…GOD

By: AL

AL — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 02:56:00 +0000

I am usually sympathetic to Rem’s provocations, polemical offerings and musings but this is very hard to buy into. Square peg through a round hole! I really miss the intelligence and prowess of OMA’s early architectural works. Has the tank finally run dry?

By: patrick

patrick — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 02:38:45 +0000

i wonder how does he keep getting work, building+crane=nutthouse

By: Drunkmuse

Drunkmuse — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:22:11 +0000

One of the most Ridiculous Indulgences I have witnessed. As always…Rem Koolhaas tries to be the impish court jester of the architecture world. Whereas he may think his exploits are provocative and innovative, his “at times” reckless interpretations of “information driven architecture” manisfested as living breathing environment reduces our built environment to a new kitsch.
This Pavillion once again, is the perfect answer to a question that nobody asked!!

By: jiri

jiri — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 15:40:19 +0000

Yes, I am also fed up with all of this archi-stars. But in this case I can see at least some humour in it. And this is not so super expensive thing and may be also not building – may be something like pavilion.

By: francesco

francesco — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 15:21:31 +0000

i’m rather sick with all of this archi-star crap.
That’s probably the most idiot design i’ve seen in a long time.
people and architecture itself deserve more intelligent, effective and dign ways of spending such a huge amount of money.

By: jiri

jiri — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 09:51:22 +0000

I think the point of Koolhaas is designing something between joke and reality. And this is just it.

You need 4 cranes to rotate it now (when in construction), but I haven´t seen how does it work when finished (definitely better).

By: dave

dave — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 03:33:09 +0000

maybe the crane idea, which seems to be taking a lot of heat, is a result of time/cost constraints–it is a temporary pavilion afterall, and not a permanent structure. i agree that a self-rotating structure would be more elegant and probably preferred by the designer if time and money allowed. it takes a lot of time to design a custom hydraulic system for a rotating tetrahedral structure! it’s not a symple rotation.

just some thoughts. i’m sure in our theoretical project or studio project we can come up with brilliant solutions, but faced with the reality of construction and constraints, maybe this was deemed the most optimal strategy.

By: ha ha

ha ha — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 23:49:24 +0000

I couldn’t have said it better myself carlo.

What a joke.

I think the transforming idea is riculous the building could be a whole lot more subtle with the flexibility of use.

And if it were to change shape as shown, it should really be designed to do so mechanically by mechanics, hydraulics whatever not de-reconstruction by use of crane….phhhh

By: New images for the Prada transformer at datafarmer

New images for the Prada transformer at datafarmer — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 22:19:04 +0000

[...] sent us this new images for their latest AMO project, the Prada Transformer. More images after the [...]

By: New images for the Prada transformer - Style of Design

New images for the Prada transformer - Style of Design — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 12:31:08 +0000

[...] sent us this new images for their latest AMO project, the Prada Transformer. More images after the [...]

By: lucas

lucas — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 17:33:52 +0000

Come on Prada and Koreans, don’t let him do whatever he wants just because he is a star architect. You deserve some respect! This building is a joke.