-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Eurovision Song Contest 2015 |OT| Austro-Australovision
- Thread starter Red Arremer
- Start date
- Status
I'm still a bit salty over Opera Skaala's defeat in Finnish national finals, they would've been glorious in Eurovision. Yet, I can not help but think that we really sent something far, far better.
Red Arremer
Member
Next year you'll try lobbying your country to send this awesome stuff to ESC, and I'll try to get mine to send Johann Sebastian Bass and we can have a wigs and fancy costume party.
A strange confluence of events led me to a Eurovision party yesterday...an event I had literally never even heard of.
I actually had a great goddamn time. Sweden was super catchy, I really enjoyed Spain, Serbia, Latvia, and oddly, Georgia, which no one else seemed to have liked.
Gonna catch it next year too! Thanks, Europe!
I actually had a great goddamn time. Sweden was super catchy, I really enjoyed Spain, Serbia, Latvia, and oddly, Georgia, which no one else seemed to have liked.
Gonna catch it next year too! Thanks, Europe!
FortuneFaded
Member
What country are you in?
Please elaborate a bit. It's always interesting to hear what peoples first impressions are when seeing Eurovision the first time. It's usually bafflement over what's going on.
I'm in Los Angeles. I ended up hanging with a bunch of Aussies the night before, crashed with them because my friend failed to pick me up that night, then *they* got invited to a Eurovision party the next day, and I just tagged along.
They quickly explained to me how it worked...apparently some of these songs have been on YouTube forever, but I hadn't heard them, so it was all new to me. The stage and production values were pretty spectacular, and the incredible *speed* of the competition kept me drawn in. That alone was so different from how it would have been handled in America, I could hardly believe it.
The points reveal, going to every country individually, seemed a little clunky and slow...but it was good for building drama, I suppose. I'm aware there's a lot of political and historical bias in the voting, but hey, that's humanity, and as an outsider, I didn't really care. I thought Italy was a little too highly ranked, but I also don't know the general musical tastes of Europe, so.
Russia girl and Sweden guy are literally along the most attractive people on the planet Earth. COINCIDENCE? I think not!
Red Arremer
Member
Alright, final adjustment to the OP - I added the finals' live performances and a link to the scoreboards.
Definitely looking forward to next year.
Definitely looking forward to next year.
FortuneFaded
Member
It could be worse. They used to read out who won the points from 1 all the way to 12 and not just the top three.
Here a comparison of points given by televotes and jury.
Italy: 365 televote, 183 juries
Russia: 286 televote, 240 juries
Sweden: 279 televote, 363 juries
Yes, the jury is a joke and "surpise" they coincidently aligned with betting houses. Anyway "industry veterans" with their ties to corporations as jury sounded fishy from the get-go.
Italy: 365 televote, 183 juries
Russia: 286 televote, 240 juries
Sweden: 279 televote, 363 juries
Yes, the jury is a joke and "surpise" they coincidently aligned with betting houses. Anyway "industry veterans" with their ties to corporations as jury sounded fishy from the get-go.
Thanks. It was an interesting read.
To give you a bit of a better insight of what was going on, it's a friendly competition between the national broadcasting companies in EBU (European Broadcasting Union). The songs haven't been on YT forever, the broadcasters choose their song in different ways, but the song has to be new and can't be published in any way before september of the previous year. And they can't be longer than 3 minutes.
And it's the biggest party in Europe. Around 180 million people watch it every year.
Bring back Loreen.
show me your skeleton
Member
we used to have to wait for men on horseback to travel between country to deliver the votes.
thankfully in 2006 that all changed.
protomouse
Member
Oh yeah, she did a live performance of this track at the Swedish qualifiers this year (not as a contestant).
http://youtu.be/XhD6866ROXU
sono
Member
Heros dont bow
Yup. Some conservative folks shat their pants when they saw her, ehum, "outfit" :')
They should just make the winners of X-factor be our automatic choice for Eurovision, it would be a cheap option that would give the winner a clear early goal rather than just winning X-factor and then being left to their own devices.
Captain Europe
Member
Was just thinking that Holland should do the same with The Voice of Holland.
Damon Bennet
Member
That's a good idea. The one stumbling block is the different channels since I can't see ITV oking it but at least the winner would get more exposure and there would be a chance of the "daft" X Factor contestants doing better with the prospect of entering the Eurovision at the end
pinkurocket
Member
Belgium sent a The Voice winner this year. Also two years ago with Roberto Belarrossa. They were both winners (or contestants I don't actually know) of The Voice Belgique. Definitely it's a good strategy. You have a singer that'll be able to hold their own live vocally and at least some kind of public appeal to win such a contest.
However, last year we did a separate melfest-ish show to choose a winner and that ended horrendously. I have no idea why people voted for that mess, the show was way to pushy in getting him to win.
The French (Wallonia) and Dutch (Flanders) parts of Belgium switch each year with choosing the representative, since both have their own network of TV channels. This year and 2 years ago it was Wallonia, they def know what's up. Us flemish folk, not so much.
However, last year we did a separate melfest-ish show to choose a winner and that ended horrendously. I have no idea why people voted for that mess, the show was way to pushy in getting him to win.
The French (Wallonia) and Dutch (Flanders) parts of Belgium switch each year with choosing the representative, since both have their own network of TV channels. This year and 2 years ago it was Wallonia, they def know what's up. Us flemish folk, not so much.
Red Arremer
Member
So watching the old ESCs, I found the year in which the foundation for flashy stage shows over just standing around and singing or perhaps dancing just a little was laid. It was 1977.
And of course, it's the fault of Spain and Austria. Habsburgian antics confirmed to make Eurovision into Eurovision.
Though I don't think it really took off properly until Dschingis Khan.
And of course, it's the fault of Spain and Austria. Habsburgian antics confirmed to make Eurovision into Eurovision.
Though I don't think it really took off properly until Dschingis Khan.
Wagner at Eurovision with his bongos and scantily clad dancers would have been the UK's highlight for decades to come.
Wagner for Eurovision 2016.
pinkurocket
Member
Aaaah I am LIVING for this!! It's so amazing. Malena Ernman wishes she could.
But I agree, the Finnish entry that made it was much deserves as well. So unexpected, but powerful in it's own way.
We should have sent She's After My Piano last year.
Red Arremer
Member
I want Belgium to split so both Wallonia and Flanders can be part of Eurovision on their own, mostly because I want to see Wallonia's flag in it:
There can never be enough cock in ESC
Worked really good for Germany 2010 with Lena too. The follow-up casting winner Roman Lob also did good in the rankings as 8th in 2012.
After that, broadcaster ARD went with a different take. A mix of public voting and jury system, with only one show and a mix of well-known and unknown acts and since then Germany failed again. (21, 18, and now the 27. rank).
But that was a casting show for Eurovision, not your typical The Voice and what have you. How did that show establish itself as the de facto casting show anyway? Greece sent another The Voice winner this year. That boring ballad you've already forgot.
pinkurocket
Member
Ooooh yes, that would've been a party!
Finally got to watch this year's Eurovision. It's not as fun if you don't watch it live with all the online reactions.
I like Sweden, but I preferred Estonia's and Australia's entries more. I felt bad that Estonia was robbed off a Top 5 finish, but happy that Latvia got that despite being pretty much dismissed by fans the entire contest.
Serbia was a pleasant surprise IMO. I'm also happy it got a Top 10 finish.
But then again, as a whole, I found Eurovision 2014 still better. There were just so much campier entries, but whatever good-quality songs we had were really REALLY good (though generally, the quality of the songs are higher this year, but they're just not as fun or campy on stage) The voting pattern last year was also much more exciting with lots of countries getting 12s in the first half of the vote call. I pretty much called Sweden winning even before the contest, while last year I really thought Armenia or Hungary had it.
I like Sweden, but I preferred Estonia's and Australia's entries more. I felt bad that Estonia was robbed off a Top 5 finish, but happy that Latvia got that despite being pretty much dismissed by fans the entire contest.
Serbia was a pleasant surprise IMO. I'm also happy it got a Top 10 finish.
But then again, as a whole, I found Eurovision 2014 still better. There were just so much campier entries, but whatever good-quality songs we had were really REALLY good (though generally, the quality of the songs are higher this year, but they're just not as fun or campy on stage) The voting pattern last year was also much more exciting with lots of countries getting 12s in the first half of the vote call. I pretty much called Sweden winning even before the contest, while last year I really thought Armenia or Hungary had it.
Conchita Wurst got all of the points this year.
Red Arremer
Member
This is the first time the host country scored 0 points in the entire 60 year history of Eurovision. The second time a host country places dead last, as well. The last time that happened was the Netherlands in 1958 with 1 point (funnily they shared that with Luxembourg, so there's some common element here too).
And note that in 1958, the point system also was different from nowadays (there were less points to give).
Ophiuchus
Member
When I listened to her for the first time in this contest I thought that she is too much for Eurovision.Also her art of singing and performing is so high that it cannot be compared to most performances in this contest.It is nice to see her pursuing her vision.
Hey! Tom Dice few years back wasn't that bad. (Not as good as Loïc but still)
s_mirage
Member
The prime example of this problem was the example of Poland in the UK voting last year. The Polish song sucked but those butter churners propelled it to the number 1 position in the televotes. However, the jury rated it last, resulting in it receiving 0 points from the UK.
Debates about the merits of the song aside, it seems disgusting that a small panel can effectively nullify the views of the voting public.
Red Arremer
Member
On the other hand, there's plenty of arguments to be made for a jury, as it reduces the impact of diaspora voting and, to a lesser extent, bloc voting.
Albania placed 9th overall in the televoting, and we all heard that awful performance.
s_mirage
Member
While I agree to an extent, I'd argue that the final score should be weighted so that the jury cannot completely nullify the televote result, especially given that the juries have voted before the final. In the example I gave, every vote for Poland was a waste as there was no possibility of Poland ever scoring points from the UK. This is unacceptable, especially when voting costs money.
If we are to keep the 50/50 split, the very least that needs to happen is to replace the juries with larger panels chosen to create a mix of music industry professionals and members of the general public.
Red Arremer
Member
I can completely understand your qualms about the current system, but on the other hand, I feel like that there is absolutely no way to have the perfect system anyway.
Obviously the juries have their own agendas and aren't objective, but the same can be said about the televoting. I feel like the 50:50 split between televoting and jury has been an alright system for the most part. It's not very often that examples like you are bringing are the case, anyway.
It became more likely due to the rule change that juries are not deciding about the top ten, but now about the whole 26/27. So if a jury positions a country at the bottom, it will have no chance. Its stupid.
Red Arremer
Member
imo the jury should discuss about stuff and democratically decide their point range from 1 to 12. That'd probably be the best solution.
Yeah, it is stupid to send the winner. Flanders never elects the best person in those contests. It is difficult to find a Flemish song contest where the winner became the most famous.
No, we didn't. He became second. THey just were smart enough to send him instead of the winner. Bellarosa did win.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked