Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Would they recognize those things as being in Miami, though? Because there's a difference between saying
"hey, I saw that in Goldfinger!" vs. saying "hey, that's in Miami!"
Yeah, I was putting it more in the "Yeah, I've seen that before, but not sure where it is" category.
Quote:
Miami has a great national and international image as a city on the whole, but quite honestly? I don't think it has any iconic landmark on a national or international scale. St. Louis, which is a much less prominent city globally right now, has the Arch....Miami just doesn't have anything on that kind of scale of recognition...
Sorry. I still think you are wrong. We can agree to disagree.
The OP says to list cities that don't have an identifiable landmark. Ocean Drive with its historic art deco hotels is VERY identifiable as Miami. In fact, it's so identifiable, it's almost always the scene/location selected to highlight Miami on national televised events. When the Super Bowl is in in Miami, the network sets up in Lumus park to have the strip as its backdrop. I was down on Ocean today and the BCS crew is busy setting up for the NCAA football national championship with, you guessed it, the Ocean Drive strip is its backdrop. When the Today Show, Good Morning America, etc. set up telecasts, they choose the very same location on purpose. It's quintessential Miami and most people instantly recognize it as so.
In fact, I am sitting here watching the Orange Bowl right now and guess what they show as they cut to a commercial? That's right, it's Ocean Drive....despite the fact that the stadium is 17 miles away.
I'm from the same region as srsmn and I think I could pinpoint Miami if I saw those pics. So it probably depends on the viewer just as much as it depends on how actually "iconic" something is.
New York City has the Empire State Building.
St. Louis has the Gateway Arch.
San Francisco has the Golden Gate Bridge.
Toronto has the CN Tower.
Los Angeles has the Hollywood Sign.
etc.
^These are all identifiable landmarks, but what are the 5 biggest cities in North America that do NOT have an identifiable landmark in your opinion?
Ok... this is the OP's first post. Nothing changed, nothing taken out... this is it.
I made my posts, everyone else has made their's, so let's just leave it at that.
Sorry. I still think you are wrong. We can agree to disagree.
The OP says to list cities that don't have an identifiable landmark. Ocean Drive with its historic art deco hotels is VERY identifiable as Miami. In fact, it's so identifiable, it's almost always the scene/location selected to highlight Miami on national televised events. When the Super Bowl is in in Miami, the network sets up in Lumus park to have the strip as its backdrop. I was down on Ocean today and the BCS crew is busy setting up for the NCAA football national championship with, you guessed it, the Ocean Drive strip is its backdrop. When the Today Show, Good Morning America, etc. set up telecasts, they choose the very same location on purpose. It's quintessential Miami and most people instantly recognize it as so.
In fact, I am sitting here watching the Orange Bowl right now and guess what they show as they cut to a commercial? That's right, it's Ocean Drive....despite the fact that the stadium is 17 miles away.
I think Miami or at least Miami Beach has a very idenfiable streetscape with the Art Deco district of South Beach and Ocean Drive. However, it's sort of different than having an identifiable landmark that people know the name and location of. If you show someone a photo of Lummus Park, a majority might go, "Oh, that's Miami", however they probably wouldn't know the specific name of the park. Similar to how you could show the famous shot of the Victorian houses on Alamo Square in San Francisco with downtown in the background and people might know it's San Francisco, but they might not have any idea what it's actually called. New Orleans sort of falls into this as well, as there's a streetscape that's easily identifiable as the French Quarter, but I'm not sure if the average person can name the St. Louis Cathedral or other locations outside of saying "Bourbon Street".
It's a little different than what the OP seemed to be going for which are single buildings or monuments that are so famous that almost anyone would know the name and location--and which cities don't have a single landmark or something with that level of notoriety. Like the Hollywood Sign or Statue of Liberty. It's sort of a rarefied level of fame though, so there's really not all that many cities in the US that have something that the lowest common denominator of the American populace can recognize and name from one photo alone. Others have named the handful of places that really qualify already in this thread.
I love Houston in many ways. I criticize on three cities that I like very much:
- Miami
- Austin
- Houston
Why? Houstonians need to get a grip. Look Houston has a lot of cool things about it, definitely & infinitely better place than depicted on this sorry site, that's for damn sure.
It doesn't help that Houstonians boost so much though- they boost everything all day long like it's supposed to be special. Houston has a lot of great things- some of those being iconic to Houston. The Transco Tower (sorry, Williams Tower is stupid) being the best one. Johnson Space Center- the building is butt ugly both inside & out but the Spacecraft there is iconic. Kemah Boardwalk, a Houston area icon. The 1894 Opera House from the inside- incredible but very unknown in the Houston area & rest of the world. The Moody Gardens Pyramid- again a Houston area icon but relatively unknown by the rest of the world.
I could let Houstonians pass if they were correcting someone that said "Houston has absolutely no landmarks" that's retardedly wrong. Where my issues are is that Houstonians are typically acting like people around the world know what the devil the Astrodome is. It's iconic sure, not very well known.
Overall though, in my personal opinion the only cities making any cases in this thread for iconic & well known landmarks should be New York, Washington, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Saint Louis, & maybe Seattle and Cambridge.
Alright, that's agreeable. Minneapolis used to have a similar problem as far as tearing things down goes. although, I think other cities could make a good argument towards iconic and well-known landmarks. Chicago and Orlando are two.
This thread turned out as expected....someone names a city without a famous landmark, and residents of said city take offense and name some "landmark" which is only famous locally, if that.
Houston, Phoenix, Cleveland, Columbus, Indianapolis, Milwaukee, Atlanta, Tampa, Jacksonville, Charlotte, all fit the criteria, and that's just the tip of the iceberg. Truth is very few cities in North America have a truly identifiable landmark which would be recognized out of its regional area.
Metro Atlanta does have a landmark. It is called Stone Mountain, the largest exposed piece of granite in the world.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
