Too easy. 

What qualifies Oliver Wainwright to be an architecture critic? Self appointed authority. No architect pays attention to his critique. He's only popular with female students. 

I'm more surprised that a developer approved and paid for this design.

Those photos are enough to make the case.  The least damning of them:

So the ONE thing this project has going for it is views.  But in a frenzy of (what seems like) self-defeat, he flings giant, nonstructural, unnecessary fettucine noodles at the exterior --compromising the building's solitary benefit.

this building is fascinating, it's a very pure exercise in irrational structure and unprogrammed space.

it's hard to process criticism based on environmental sustainability. artwork always falls outside the framework of standardized criteria. clearly this building has more embedded carbon than necessary to build an equivalent area of typical office space. i don't think we have to worry this building represents a trend towards expensive complicated development - it's really a one off. there will always be a place for projects that exceed the baseline - the question is only whether this qualifies as the kind of extraordinary work that deserves such excess.

As dead as a mummy.

it's an ugly building in an ugly town built only to stir some pots. 

I suppose it is mildly interesting that a person such as Moss who presents in such a hyper masculine manner (near Tom of Finland level) and has door knob on the front door of his office in the shape of a veiny penis that anyone entering must pull makes buildings that are so highly decorative. 

I dislike the review simply because it affirms EOM's own vision of his buildings' impact on Culver City. Wainright affirms it for the purpose of criticizing it... but it's still dishonest. 

Word is that EOM adores this review, as he would anything that builds up his mighty persona. Well written though.