So it is that time of the year again where we enjoy/endure the Eurovision song contest. It starts in a couple of hours.
I'm not a big fan of most of the music but will still watch some of it since it is hosted in Denmark. If anything you should watch some of it to check out the awesome stage. Its a big touch sensitive LED screen which the performers can interact with.
I usually avoid the music as much as possible and then I watch the voting trying to predict the results. It is not possible to predict the winner, but after a couple of countries you can predict the votes pretty well if you know the cultural voting groups and the political/cultural crossover (Ie. Denmark recieved points from Italy the year Giro d'Italia started here (2012), while even the viking voting group to some extend ignored the song and it ended up close to last spot).
It is a pretty abusive sport, and sorry to those enjoying the music. The music is just not the fun part for me. I predict Ukraine on the recieving end of some political votes, but usually those are not on its own enough to win.
It's loss some of its charm for me, there is still terrible music but it's a lot more homogenised and the stage production is too damn slick, needs to be less competent in that respect to truly tap into this grand European tradition
On May 11 2014 05:55 Wombat_NI wrote: It's loss some of its charm for me, there is still terrible music but it's a lot more homogenised and the stage production is too damn slick, needs to be less competent in that respect to truly tap into this grand European tradition
On May 11 2014 05:55 Wombat_NI wrote: It's loss some of its charm for me, there is still terrible music but it's a lot more homogenised and the stage production is too damn slick, needs to be less competent in that respect to truly tap into this grand European tradition
This is pretty much spot on, it takes away from the terrible when false notes are accompanied by professional production value.. Used to be you could only rely on your horrible voice and what looked like a home made costume, those were the days
The quality and entertainment of this years show makes last years show look like an amature black and white production recorded in 240p. (sorry Sweden)
Well I suppose it's just following the general trend of 'throw enough good production and you CAN polish a tied' tradition which is the bane of my exposure to contemporary mainstream stuff
On May 11 2014 06:31 Vertitto wrote: if you want more polish tits and beautiful eyes songs here's a i guess first song from Donatan's project + Show Spoiler +
On May 11 2014 06:31 Vertitto wrote: if you want more polish tits and beautiful eyes songs here's a i guess first song from Donatan's project + Show Spoiler +
On May 11 2014 06:54 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: Can they stop the fucking booing?! Poor show Denmark!
Can't blame em for standing up for freedom(although sure,this might not be the right platform for it)
Yes, Putin will certainly care about that. It's just sad to see a whole arena unable to differentiate between the russian government and two 17 year old russian singers.
On May 11 2014 06:54 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: Can they stop the fucking booing?! Poor show Denmark!
Can't blame em for standing up for freedom(although sure,this might not be the right platform for it)
Thats a bullshit fucking excuse. Isolation of this kind has never helped anything. If anything it turns ordinary Russians against the west. Do you really think Putin watches eurovision?
On May 11 2014 06:54 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: Can they stop the fucking booing?! Poor show Denmark!
Can't blame em for standing up for freedom(although sure,this might not be the right platform for it)
Yes, Putin will certainly care about that. It's just sad to see a whole arena unable to differentiate between the russian government and two 17 year old russian singers.
because we expected otherwise from the atendees of the eurovision facepalm event? =)
Haha imagining Putin being really into Eurovision secretly, banners and silly hats adorning the Putin household, a single tear falling down his usually dispassionate face...
On May 11 2014 06:54 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: Can they stop the fucking booing?! Poor show Denmark!
Can't blame em for standing up for freedom(although sure,this might not be the right platform for it)
Yes, Putin will certainly care about that. It's just sad to see a whole arena unable to differentiate between the russian government and two 17 year old russian singers.
because we expected otherwise from the atendees of the eurovision facepalm event? =)
Not neccessarily. It being sad and it being surprising are two different things though.
On May 11 2014 07:05 Wombat_NI wrote: Haha imagining Putin being really into Eurovision secretly, banners and silly hats adorning the Putin household, a single tear falling down his usually dispassionate face...
On May 11 2014 06:54 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: Can they stop the fucking booing?! Poor show Denmark!
Can't blame em for standing up for freedom(although sure,this might not be the right platform for it)
Thats a bullshit fucking excuse. Isolation of this kind has never helped anything. If anything it turns ordinary Russians against the west. Do you really think Putin watches eurovision?
I don't really want to sound 'murican, but freedom should not have to be excused. And as I said, there are better platforms for it tho
On May 11 2014 07:13 Zera wrote: I truly believe that shemale gets points only for who she/he is. For instance Spain artist's vocal was way better, bu they dont get many points :/
i cant remember when eurovision was ever about the actual music, it's all about the show and how many neighbouring countries you have
On May 11 2014 07:11 nkr wrote: i would boo russia as well ;p use every opportunity possible to show what the people of europe think
It is a contest for musicians. It is not a platform to discuss about Russian/Ukrainian politics. You are far more likely to hurt the artists than anyone else. Especially given their age. Russian top politicians probably know the opinion of the "people of europe", although I wouldn't say, that those are exactly one-sided as well, but that has nothing to do in this thread.
On May 11 2014 07:11 nkr wrote: i would boo russia as well ;p use every opportunity possible to show what the people of europe think
It is a contest for musicians. It is not a platform to discuss about Russian/Ukrainian politics. You are far more likely to hurt the artists than anyone else. Especially given their age. Russian top politicians probably know the opinion of the "people of europe", although I wouldn't say, that those are exactly one-sided as well, but that has nothing to do in this thread.
On May 11 2014 07:13 Zera wrote: I truly believe that shemale gets points only for who she/he is. For instance Spain artist's vocal was way better, bu they dont get many points :/
i cant remember when eurovision was ever about the actual music, it's all about the show and how many neighbouring countries you have
Yes because Austria is bordering all countries in Europe.
On May 11 2014 07:13 Zera wrote: I truly believe that shemale gets points only for who she/he is. For instance Spain artist's vocal was way better, bu they dont get many points :/
i cant remember when eurovision was ever about the actual music, it's all about the show and how many neighbouring countries you have
Yes because Austria is bordering all countries in Europe.
On May 11 2014 07:11 nkr wrote: i would boo russia as well ;p use every opportunity possible to show what the people of europe think
It is a contest for musicians. It is not a platform to discuss about Russian/Ukrainian politics. You are far more likely to hurt the artists than anyone else. Especially given their age. Russian top politicians probably know the opinion of the "people of europe", although I wouldn't say, that those are exactly one-sided as well, but that has nothing to do in this thread.
some things are bigger than music
Too bad those things are absolutely irrelevant. On another note: is this some sort of trolling? Because i have hard time understanding what gender is 'it', granted i am yet to hear any song from this Euro.
Lol Eurovision. Can someone tell me why is it so popular ? Trust me or not first time ever i watch more than 25 minutes of Eurovision and i just came in the middle of the votes.
Once? We have the record for most 0s, I had this come up as a question in a quiz not too long ago. Think it was a total of 4 times we netted 0 points rofl.
On May 11 2014 07:11 nkr wrote: i would boo russia as well ;p use every opportunity possible to show what the people of europe think
It is a contest for musicians. It is not a platform to discuss about Russian/Ukrainian politics. You are far more likely to hurt the artists than anyone else. Especially given their age. Russian top politicians probably know the opinion of the "people of europe", although I wouldn't say, that those are exactly one-sided as well, but that has nothing to do in this thread.
some things are bigger than music
Too bad those things are absolutely irrelevant. On another note: is this some sort of trolling? Because i have hard time understanding what gender is 'it', granted i am yet to hear any song from this Euro.
Also dunno if you meant it to, but this comes of as really condescending..
On May 11 2014 07:22 Warfie wrote: Once? We have the record for most 0s, I had this come up as a question in a quiz not too long ago. Think it was a total of 4 times we netted 0 points rofl.
On May 11 2014 07:11 nkr wrote: i would boo russia as well ;p use every opportunity possible to show what the people of europe think
It is a contest for musicians. It is not a platform to discuss about Russian/Ukrainian politics. You are far more likely to hurt the artists than anyone else. Especially given their age. Russian top politicians probably know the opinion of the "people of europe", although I wouldn't say, that those are exactly one-sided as well, but that has nothing to do in this thread.
some things are bigger than music
Sure they are. And thus there are bigger (and more important) platforms to talk about it than ESC. I mean, sure, the contest isn't purely about music for quite some time now, but this aggression towards artists just because of their nationality is absolutely inappropriate.
Good that people finally started cheering for russian votes and even better that Austria won! Wp and gg Conchita Wurst and good for human rights in all of Europe. Fuck off to all the people that protested against transsexuals!
On May 11 2014 07:22 Makro wrote: Lol Eurovision. Can someone tell me why is it so popular ? Trust me or not first time ever i watch more than 25 minutes of Eurovision and i just came in the middle of the votes.
I and just watch in because of tradition and the randomness, that sometimes happens. If you solely judge the program by it's quality, it isn't that great.
On May 11 2014 07:18 Fatalize wrote: I'm actuallyn kind of sad France didnt stay at 0 points. Would have been hilarious
That happened to Norway once a long time ago I think.
no country has ever gotten 0 points as often as Norway
It's strange cause Norway has some good Black Metal bands
But It's probably not what Eurovision's viewers are into
Yeah, Norway too sophisticated for this. I must say, Finland managed to sneak in some real music once though, and Lordi won the whole thing with the Hard Rock Hallelujah. After that I thought they would put the whole Eurovision to rest, but clearly that didn't happen.
On May 11 2014 07:28 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: Good that people finally started cheering for russian votes and even better that Austria won! Wp and gg Conchita Wurst and good for human rights in all of Europe. Fuck off to all the people that protested against transsexuals!
this is actually the second time a transsexual wins ESC. + Show Spoiler +
On May 11 2014 07:29 DaCruise wrote: Sure I am biased but this show will get remembered for many years to come for so many reasons.
Question: how many of them are right? After hearing the closing song, the winner certainly is one only for reasons unrelated to singing. And i am now convinced that the winner is chosen with punishing the winning country in mid.
On May 11 2014 07:28 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: Good that people finally started cheering for russian votes and even better that Austria won! Wp and gg Conchita Wurst and good for human rights in all of Europe. Fuck off to all the people that protested against transsexuals!
this is actually the second time a transsexual wins ESC. + Show Spoiler +
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZ5B6w-Baxs
Conchita Wurst is no transsexual. He is a man, he feels like a man - the female clothing just helps him to gain popularity; and that's the main concern I've got with the victory, tbh. I just think that Conchita Wurst preaches the opposite of what he actually does...
On May 11 2014 07:18 Fatalize wrote: I'm actuallyn kind of sad France didnt stay at 0 points. Would have been hilarious
That happened to Norway once a long time ago I think.
no country has ever gotten 0 points as often as Norway
It's strange cause Norway has some good Black Metal bands
But It's probably not what Eurovision's viewers are into
there was a metal band that got 2nd in our national final a few years ago.
I am sure Finland would have gave 12p to them :D
You should get Strato or Sonata or something for Euro, that'd be great!
They would never participate (they have some self respect). Also who watches Finlands national final anymore? It used to be called as Eurovision finnish finals but now its program called uuden musiikin kilpailu. There are few judges (like in idols, voice of.. etc.) And they coach people who participate....Idk single person that watches that...
On May 11 2014 07:29 DaCruise wrote: Sure I am biased but this show will get remembered for many years to come for so many reasons.
And i am now convinced that the winner is chosen with punishing the winning country in mid.
What do you mean, because it's so expensive for the host ?
It is costlier to host than not to host for this one country. That's already punishing in itself by-idea. Or i am missing something and hosting costs are covered in full via any means? Also, should we consider 'it' a drag queen, considering he did keep the beard. And my god, Russia's attention whores are certainly butthurt now, i am entertained.
On May 11 2014 07:29 DaCruise wrote: Sure I am biased but this show will get remembered for many years to come for so many reasons.
And i am now convinced that the winner is chosen with punishing the winning country in mid.
What do you mean, because it's so expensive for the host ?
It is costlier to host than not to host for this one country. That's already punishing in itself by-idea. Or i am missing something and hosting costs are covered in full via any means?
Hosting was always an expense as such, but of course it is also used for promoting the hosting countries all over Europe. You rarely get this kind of coverage.
On May 11 2014 07:29 DaCruise wrote: Sure I am biased but this show will get remembered for many years to come for so many reasons.
And i am now convinced that the winner is chosen with punishing the winning country in mid.
What do you mean, because it's so expensive for the host ?
It is costlier to host than not to host for this one country. That's already punishing in itself by-idea. Or i am missing something and hosting costs are covered in full via any means?
No I think the host pays for everything, there was a huge discussion here in Norway when Rybak won some years ago. But I really feel like you've basically agreed to such expenses by definition if you participate
On May 11 2014 07:39 karfussen wrote: I feel bad for both Netherlands and Sweden. They didn't deserve to lose to Austria.
I am glad that Sweden didnt win again even though they had a great song. I cheered for the Netherlands but I am fine with Austria winning. Mostly I am glad that Armenia didnt win cause that guy couldnt sing at all. Cant believe Armenia was the favorite 1 week ago.
On May 11 2014 07:30 Warfie wrote: On another note this must have been damn expensive to host
I think the quality of the songs this year was better then usually.
I would disagree here. A bit of it was decent stuff in there but quite a lot was really interchangeable as well. I'd say last year for example was stronger.
On May 11 2014 07:29 DaCruise wrote: Sure I am biased but this show will get remembered for many years to come for so many reasons.
And i am now convinced that the winner is chosen with punishing the winning country in mid.
What do you mean, because it's so expensive for the host ?
It is costlier to host than not to host for this one country. That's already punishing in itself by-idea. Or i am missing something and hosting costs are covered in full via any means?
No I think the host pays for everything, there was a huge discussion here in Norway when Rybak won some years ago. But I really feel like you've basically agreed to such expenses by definition if you participate
Dammit, Russian TV, did not mention a thing about expenses coverage when there was ESC in Moscow.
Some argue that the promotion and increased tourism income balance it out. But most agree that is cost more then you gain. I guess it varies from country to country. When Azerbaijan won they spent a record 1 billion dollars.
On May 11 2014 07:29 DaCruise wrote: Sure I am biased but this show will get remembered for many years to come for so many reasons.
And i am now convinced that the winner is chosen with punishing the winning country in mid.
What do you mean, because it's so expensive for the host ?
It is costlier to host than not to host for this one country. That's already punishing in itself by-idea. Or i am missing something and hosting costs are covered in full via any means?
No I think the host pays for everything, there was a huge discussion here in Norway when Rybak won some years ago. But I really feel like you've basically agreed to such expenses by definition if you participate
And what about the "Big 4" (Germany, UK, Italy, Spain)? Don't they pay quite a lot as well?
On May 11 2014 07:18 Fatalize wrote: I'm actuallyn kind of sad France didnt stay at 0 points. Would have been hilarious
That happened to Norway once a long time ago I think.
no country has ever gotten 0 points as often as Norway
It's strange cause Norway has some good Black Metal bands
But It's probably not what Eurovision's viewers are into
there was a metal band that got 2nd in our national final a few years ago.
I am sure Finland would have gave 12p to them :D
You should get Strato or Sonata or something for Euro, that'd be great!
They would never participate (they have some self respect). Also who watches Finlands national final anymore? It used to be called as Eurovision finnish finals but now its program called uuden musiikin kilpailu. There are few judges (like in idols, voice of.. etc.) And they coach people who participate....Idk single person that watches that...
Yeah, there are probably some obstacles Still, I'd vote the hell out of that ^^
Johnny Logan used to win this for Ireland all the time in the 80s (like 4 times or so) and the Irish, who were not so rich back then, were getting all paranoid, suspecting that Europe let poor Ireland win on purpose, so that they would have to host the show and stay poor.
The crisis in Ukraine, drag queen winning and the gay marriage stunt comes to mind as some of the non-music things that I think this will be remembered for. The booing certainly didn't fit, but if you want a live audience you have to deal with people doing inappropriate things.
On May 11 2014 07:49 radiatoren wrote: The crisis in Ukraine, drag queen winning and the gay marriage stunt comes to mind as some of the non-music things that I think this will be remembered for. The booing certainly didn't fit, but if you want a live audience you have to deal with people doing inappropriate things.
at least it was not boring, too bad that for wrong reasons
it was a great and fun show i think. also a really nice stage. the booing was nonsense. poland was god damn bad. we got a good winner who even did get points from israel and ireland i mean what in the wooooooorld. wow. overall a great evening with a big surprise imo
On May 11 2014 08:00 Undead1993 wrote: it was a great and fun show i think. also a really nice stage. the booing was nonsense. poland was god damn bad. we got a good winner who even did get points from israel and ireland i mean what in the wooooooorld. wow. overall a great evening with a big surprise imo
Germany made me happy though, and gave Poland 10 points!
On May 11 2014 07:49 radiatoren wrote: The crisis in Ukraine, drag queen winning and the gay marriage stunt comes to mind as some of the non-music things that I think this will be remembered for. The booing certainly didn't fit, but if you want a live audience you have to deal with people doing inappropriate things.
Well, of course you have to deal with it. But it's still terribly harsh for the two girls. And I was kinda impressed how well they performed today after the booing in the semi-finals tbh. They knew nobody liked them and still they got to perform once again...
And the ESC shouldn't be political, since the singers aren't responsible for the crisis...
On May 11 2014 07:49 radiatoren wrote: The crisis in Ukraine, drag queen winning and the gay marriage stunt comes to mind as some of the non-music things that I think this will be remembered for. The booing certainly didn't fit, but if you want a live audience you have to deal with people doing inappropriate things.
Well, of course you have to deal with it. But it's still terribly harsh for the two girls. And I was kinda impressed how well they performed today after the booing in the semi-finals tbh. They knew nobody liked them and still they got to perform once again...
And the ESC shouldn't be political, since the singers aren't responsible for the crisis...
even though i didn't like it, you can't expect people to not be affected by the information they get from the media. and a lot of hate went through the western media towards russia lately, of course rightfully so but still.
On May 11 2014 07:49 radiatoren wrote: The crisis in Ukraine, drag queen winning and the gay marriage stunt comes to mind as some of the non-music things that I think this will be remembered for. The booing certainly didn't fit, but if you want a live audience you have to deal with people doing inappropriate things.
Well, of course you have to deal with it. But it's still terribly harsh for the two girls. And I was kinda impressed how well they performed today after the booing in the semi-finals tbh. They knew nobody liked them and still they got to perform once again...
And the ESC shouldn't be political, since the singers aren't responsible for the crisis...
Absolutely. It is very unfair to the girls.
In the perfect world ESC is not political, but that has never stopped it from being so before and it won't stop being it in the future. As sad as it is, policy will always play a role in any competition.
Classy way would have been if the host had after the initial booing before the second performance mentioned the 'Yes, boo 17 year-old girls, that'll realllly show Putin' line.
On May 11 2014 07:49 radiatoren wrote: The crisis in Ukraine, drag queen winning and the gay marriage stunt comes to mind as some of the non-music things that I think this will be remembered for. The booing certainly didn't fit, but if you want a live audience you have to deal with people doing inappropriate things.
Well, of course you have to deal with it. But it's still terribly harsh for the two girls. And I was kinda impressed how well they performed today after the booing in the semi-finals tbh. They knew nobody liked them and still they got to perform once again...
And the ESC shouldn't be political, since the singers aren't responsible for the crisis...
even though i didn't like it, you can't expect people to not be affected by the information they get from the media. and a lot of hate went through the western media towards russia lately, of course rightfully so but still.
Well, then make it political, but avoid blaming the people on stage for the shit they're government is doing. There should be other ways to show the denial of the government's deeds than booing some 17 year old twins, which should have had the greatest day of their carreer. If that's the only way someone can raise his/her voice against something, they should better just shut up.
I don't expect the people not to be affected at all, I expect them to have at least some sympathy for the PEOPLE on stage. And I expect them to be able to differentiate between two 17 year old girls and the government in their country - and I don't think that's too much to expect...
It was really ironic that after something like that, Conchita Wurst concluded the event winning and with her "Tolerance Speech".
On May 11 2014 07:49 radiatoren wrote: The crisis in Ukraine, drag queen winning and the gay marriage stunt comes to mind as some of the non-music things that I think this will be remembered for. The booing certainly didn't fit, but if you want a live audience you have to deal with people doing inappropriate things.
Well, of course you have to deal with it. But it's still terribly harsh for the two girls. And I was kinda impressed how well they performed today after the booing in the semi-finals tbh. They knew nobody liked them and still they got to perform once again...
And the ESC shouldn't be political, since the singers aren't responsible for the crisis...
They are still representing their country, a country which is doing quite a lot of dirty deeds as of late. I hope the girls don't take it personally, but I am very happy that the crowd boo'd Russia.
And I atleast liked the Austria song, infact it was pretty much the only song I liked. It's kind of funny, I always go into the ESC thinking "god that icelandic song sucks" and then I hear the rest of the songs and go "we might have a shot!"
On May 11 2014 07:49 radiatoren wrote: The crisis in Ukraine, drag queen winning and the gay marriage stunt comes to mind as some of the non-music things that I think this will be remembered for. The booing certainly didn't fit, but if you want a live audience you have to deal with people doing inappropriate things.
Well, of course you have to deal with it. But it's still terribly harsh for the two girls. And I was kinda impressed how well they performed today after the booing in the semi-finals tbh. They knew nobody liked them and still they got to perform once again...
And the ESC shouldn't be political, since the singers aren't responsible for the crisis...
They are still representing their country, a country which is doing quite a lot of dirty deeds as of late. I hope the girls don't take it personally, but I am very happy that the crowd boo'd Russia.
And I atleast liked the Austria song, infact it was pretty much the only song I liked. It's kind of funny, I always go into the ESC thinking "god that icelandic song sucks" and then I hear the rest of the songs and go "we might have a shot!"
About this whole booing thing: the strange implication that it actually matters is amusing. I bet my non-existent money on that girls did get the explanation what booing meant or understand it straight away (now that's something i dare to doubt) and the supposed target of booing does not really care for he knows what everyone thinks about it already.
- a draq queen with a beard winning - an audience who is booing to 17-years old twins, who did a flawless performence ... - france getting like no points at all - and that denmark has a leonardo dicaprio
overall the quality of songs was pretty high compared to previous ESCs, which made it a bit boring aswell
I thought it was fun. Best song for me was Norway's. Other ones I liked were Sweden, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Iceland. Cringe worthy were France, Italy and the one with the circle piano.
Cool that we got second. They certainly deserved that. Since last year we actually send out competent singers to these things.
On May 11 2014 07:49 radiatoren wrote: The crisis in Ukraine, drag queen winning and the gay marriage stunt comes to mind as some of the non-music things that I think this will be remembered for. The booing certainly didn't fit, but if you want a live audience you have to deal with people doing inappropriate things.
Well, of course you have to deal with it. But it's still terribly harsh for the two girls. And I was kinda impressed how well they performed today after the booing in the semi-finals tbh. They knew nobody liked them and still they got to perform once again...
And the ESC shouldn't be political, since the singers aren't responsible for the crisis...
They are still representing their country, a country which is doing quite a lot of dirty deeds as of late. I hope the girls don't take it personally, but I am very happy that the crowd boo'd Russia.
And I atleast liked the Austria song, infact it was pretty much the only song I liked. It's kind of funny, I always go into the ESC thinking "god that icelandic song sucks" and then I hear the rest of the songs and go "we might have a shot!"
About this whole booing thing: the strange implication that it actually matters is amusing. I bet my non-existent money on that girls did get the explanation what booing meant or understand it straight away (now that's something i dare to doubt) and the supposed target of booing does not really care for he knows the treatment.
I agree, the government of Russia 100% doesn't care what an arena in Denmark does or does not do. That being said, it still shows support for Ukraine and might show Russians how some parts of EU feel about them as it stands, I feel those reasons are good enough to support the booing.
On May 11 2014 07:49 radiatoren wrote: The crisis in Ukraine, drag queen winning and the gay marriage stunt comes to mind as some of the non-music things that I think this will be remembered for. The booing certainly didn't fit, but if you want a live audience you have to deal with people doing inappropriate things.
Well, of course you have to deal with it. But it's still terribly harsh for the two girls. And I was kinda impressed how well they performed today after the booing in the semi-finals tbh. They knew nobody liked them and still they got to perform once again...
And the ESC shouldn't be political, since the singers aren't responsible for the crisis...
They are still representing their country, a country which is doing quite a lot of dirty deeds as of late. I hope the girls don't take it personally, but I am very happy that the crowd boo'd Russia.
And I atleast liked the Austria song, infact it was pretty much the only song I liked. It's kind of funny, I always go into the ESC thinking "god that icelandic song sucks" and then I hear the rest of the songs and go "we might have a shot!"
About this whole booing thing: the strange implication that it actually matters is amusing. I bet my non-existent money on that girls did get the explanation what booing meant or understand it straight away (now that's something i dare to doubt) and the supposed target of booing does not really care for he knows the treatment.
I agree, the government of Russia 100% doesn't care what an arena in Denmark does or does not do. That being said, it still shows support for Ukraine and might show Russians how some parts of EU feel about them as it stands, I feel those reasons are good enough to support the booing.
it also gives the russian gouvernment the opportunity to act like they are the victim in the whole crysis. another point is that for me personally being originally from russia it scares me that russian citizens who absolutely have no impact on the political decisions their country makes get hated only because they are from russia. this intolerantial behavior is what makes europe look like the win of this man is only a facade they can hide behind.
On May 11 2014 07:49 radiatoren wrote: The crisis in Ukraine, drag queen winning and the gay marriage stunt comes to mind as some of the non-music things that I think this will be remembered for. The booing certainly didn't fit, but if you want a live audience you have to deal with people doing inappropriate things.
Well, of course you have to deal with it. But it's still terribly harsh for the two girls. And I was kinda impressed how well they performed today after the booing in the semi-finals tbh. They knew nobody liked them and still they got to perform once again...
And the ESC shouldn't be political, since the singers aren't responsible for the crisis...
They are still representing their country, a country which is doing quite a lot of dirty deeds as of late. I hope the girls don't take it personally, but I am very happy that the crowd boo'd Russia.
And I atleast liked the Austria song, infact it was pretty much the only song I liked. It's kind of funny, I always go into the ESC thinking "god that icelandic song sucks" and then I hear the rest of the songs and go "we might have a shot!"
About this whole booing thing: the strange implication that it actually matters is amusing. I bet my non-existent money on that girls did get the explanation what booing meant or understand it straight away (now that's something i dare to doubt) and the supposed target of booing does not really care for he knows the treatment.
I agree, the government of Russia 100% doesn't care what an arena in Denmark does or does not do. That being said, it still shows support for Ukraine and might show Russians how some parts of EU feel about them as it stands, I feel those reasons are good enough to support the booing.
it also gives the russian gouvernment the opportunity to act like they are the victim in the whole crysis. another point is that for me personally being originally from russia it scares me that russian citizens who absolutely have no impact on the political decisions their country make get hated only because they are from russia. this intolerantial behavior is what makes europe look like the win of this man is only a facade they can hide behind.
I obviously don't think people should be disturbing normal Russian citizen, but when people are representing their country all bets are off. You get praises aswell as criticisms, and you just have to take it. Ofcourse it'd have been better if the representitive of Russia was older, but I assume being able to go on stage infront of 180M people, you can take a bit of booing.
Intolerence behaviour against a nation invading another nation? Yes, well I think I'm going to have to disagree with you, being intolerant against that kind of behavior is quite positive.
On May 11 2014 07:49 radiatoren wrote: The crisis in Ukraine, drag queen winning and the gay marriage stunt comes to mind as some of the non-music things that I think this will be remembered for. The booing certainly didn't fit, but if you want a live audience you have to deal with people doing inappropriate things.
Well, of course you have to deal with it. But it's still terribly harsh for the two girls. And I was kinda impressed how well they performed today after the booing in the semi-finals tbh. They knew nobody liked them and still they got to perform once again...
And the ESC shouldn't be political, since the singers aren't responsible for the crisis...
They are still representing their country, a country which is doing quite a lot of dirty deeds as of late. I hope the girls don't take it personally, but I am very happy that the crowd boo'd Russia.
And I atleast liked the Austria song, infact it was pretty much the only song I liked. It's kind of funny, I always go into the ESC thinking "god that icelandic song sucks" and then I hear the rest of the songs and go "we might have a shot!"
About this whole booing thing: the strange implication that it actually matters is amusing. I bet my non-existent money on that girls did get the explanation what booing meant or understand it straight away (now that's something i dare to doubt) and the supposed target of booing does not really care for he knows the treatment.
I agree, the government of Russia 100% doesn't care what an arena in Denmark does or does not do. That being said, it still shows support for Ukraine and might show Russians how some parts of EU feel about them as it stands, I feel those reasons are good enough to support the booing.
I don't think the booing had anything to do with Ukraine, but all to do with the Russian politicians attacking Conchita Wurst. The people visiting this type of show are generally more interested in glamor, not geopolitical power struggles I think:
This is the COMPLETE opposite of what Eurovision is suppose to represent that all EU countries coming together and compete on the ground solely based upon the singers' talent and hard work.
So far we got a person that wasn't based upon his singing ability but just because it took some "balls" (no pun intended) to dress in a certain way and people booing at a rather 'nice' performance.
From the outsider looking in 100% agreed, but for years now it's been part geo-political circlejerk. From there add novelty acts, hot chicks, a smattering of actual talent and camp kitsch thrown into the mix, the end result being some ungodly but yet oddly compelling spectacle.
I'm happy that my country didn't participate in the contest this year. Most of the time it's a complete freakshow with bad music on top of it and the countries usually vote for their neighbours no matter what. Now I saw the winner song and I was actually not surprised from what I saw. After Lordi nothing will surprise me.
Here you can check detailed results. Look for example at United Kingdom, Norway, Netherlands or Austria - viewers liked Polish tits but jury hated them
How the results would look if only televoting votes were counted: here
Here you can check detailed results. Look for example at United Kingdom, Norway, Netherlands or Austria - viewers liked Polish tits but jury hated them
Looking up through the televoting alone Poland would be in Top 3 probably
The booing was hilarious. And well, it's not like the result in other years had much to do with the music, or an artist's talent or hard work. Actually, i liked some of these songs better than i have in many years; austria's song wasn't bad at all. Also, i liked the dutch song (i always was embarrassed by our submission, as twisted just reminded me.. Fuck you TT. But this year i wasn't, for the first time in quite a while).
If you can't handle the booing, no matter how disrespectful or undeserved, you should not participate. Publicity is not for the weak of heart.
Edit: Televoting results are fucking ridiculous. >.>
On May 11 2014 07:49 radiatoren wrote: The crisis in Ukraine, drag queen winning and the gay marriage stunt comes to mind as some of the non-music things that I think this will be remembered for. The booing certainly didn't fit, but if you want a live audience you have to deal with people doing inappropriate things.
Well, of course you have to deal with it. But it's still terribly harsh for the two girls. And I was kinda impressed how well they performed today after the booing in the semi-finals tbh. They knew nobody liked them and still they got to perform once again...
And the ESC shouldn't be political, since the singers aren't responsible for the crisis...
They are still representing their country, a country which is doing quite a lot of dirty deeds as of late. I hope the girls don't take it personally, but I am very happy that the crowd boo'd Russia.
And I atleast liked the Austria song, infact it was pretty much the only song I liked. It's kind of funny, I always go into the ESC thinking "god that icelandic song sucks" and then I hear the rest of the songs and go "we might have a shot!"
About this whole booing thing: the strange implication that it actually matters is amusing. I bet my non-existent money on that girls did get the explanation what booing meant or understand it straight away (now that's something i dare to doubt) and the supposed target of booing does not really care for he knows the treatment.
I agree, the government of Russia 100% doesn't care what an arena in Denmark does or does not do. That being said, it still shows support for Ukraine and might show Russians how some parts of EU feel about them as it stands, I feel those reasons are good enough to support the booing.
it also gives the russian gouvernment the opportunity to act like they are the victim in the whole crysis. another point is that for me personally being originally from russia it scares me that russian citizens who absolutely have no impact on the political decisions their country make get hated only because they are from russia. this intolerantial behavior is what makes europe look like the win of this man is only a facade they can hide behind.
I obviously don't think people should be disturbing normal Russian citizen, but when people are representing their country all bets are off. You get praises aswell as criticisms, and you just have to take it. Ofcourse it'd have been better if the representitive of Russia was older, but I assume being able to go on stage infront of 180M people, you can take a bit of booing.
Intolerence behaviour against a nation invading another nation? Yes, well I think I'm going to have to disagree with you, being intolerant against that kind of behavior is quite positive.
you don't understand what i am saying or you are not trying. i'll leave it here
This is hilarious. UK has one of the best starting conditions of the field. Its music industry is huge and regularly sets worldwide music trends. And they have the great advantage to sing in accent free English. For years other countries lobbied to finally to be aloud to use English, since UK, Ireland and Malta always had a significant edge.
But the acts they sent are unsuitable or sometimes simply bad. Nothing to do with politics...
I think I stoped mocking the guys of Eurovision when I was a teenager, like 15 yo. Almost 20 years ago, 1994 or 1995.
I'm deeply pro EU, and EEC before, but Eurovision...come on...except Abba...It's complete BS. It's like a competition of who will be the worse singer ever...
This year's Eurovision was quite good. Not many silly acts, and the singers were all relatively good.
Russia getting booed at was great. Only one's I'm sorry for are the two girls, who probably were too brainwashed from living behind the propaganda curtain to even know what the booing was about.
On May 11 2014 09:13 Pr0wler wrote: I'm happy that my country didn't participate in the contest this year. Most of the time it's a complete freakshow with bad music on top of it and the countries usually vote for their neighbours no matter what. Now I saw the winner song and I was actually not surprised from what I saw. After Lordi nothing will surprise me.
Here you can check detailed results. Look for example at United Kingdom, Norway, Netherlands or Austria - viewers liked Polish tits but jury hated them
How the results would look if only televoting votes were counted: here
They should remove jury. Its useless and dont say same as people vote.
erm it's all in English and it sounds like generic so what's the point of this -.- I was expecting something with more "identity" since they are representing their countries.
Here you can check detailed results. Look for example at United Kingdom, Norway, Netherlands or Austria - viewers liked Polish tits but jury hated them
How the results would look if only televoting votes were counted: here
So Poland got 10 points from Germany, but only 8 points from german viewers? What does that say about our jury?
On May 11 2014 07:49 radiatoren wrote: The crisis in Ukraine, drag queen winning and the gay marriage stunt comes to mind as some of the non-music things that I think this will be remembered for. The booing certainly didn't fit, but if you want a live audience you have to deal with people doing inappropriate things.
Well, of course you have to deal with it. But it's still terribly harsh for the two girls. And I was kinda impressed how well they performed today after the booing in the semi-finals tbh. They knew nobody liked them and still they got to perform once again...
And the ESC shouldn't be political, since the singers aren't responsible for the crisis...
They are still representing their country, a country which is doing quite a lot of dirty deeds as of late. I hope the girls don't take it personally, but I am very happy that the crowd boo'd Russia.
And I atleast liked the Austria song, infact it was pretty much the only song I liked. It's kind of funny, I always go into the ESC thinking "god that icelandic song sucks" and then I hear the rest of the songs and go "we might have a shot!"
About this whole booing thing: the strange implication that it actually matters is amusing. I bet my non-existent money on that girls did get the explanation what booing meant or understand it straight away (now that's something i dare to doubt) and the supposed target of booing does not really care for he knows the treatment.
I agree, the government of Russia 100% doesn't care what an arena in Denmark does or does not do. That being said, it still shows support for Ukraine and might show Russians how some parts of EU feel about them as it stands, I feel those reasons are good enough to support the booing.
it also gives the russian gouvernment the opportunity to act like they are the victim in the whole crysis. another point is that for me personally being originally from russia it scares me that russian citizens who absolutely have no impact on the political decisions their country make get hated only because they are from russia. this intolerantial behavior is what makes europe look like the win of this man is only a facade they can hide behind.
I obviously don't think people should be disturbing normal Russian citizen, but when people are representing their country all bets are off. You get praises aswell as criticisms, and you just have to take it. Ofcourse it'd have been better if the representitive of Russia was older, but I assume being able to go on stage infront of 180M people, you can take a bit of booing.
Intolerence behaviour against a nation invading another nation? Yes, well I think I'm going to have to disagree with you, being intolerant against that kind of behavior is quite positive.
Noone invaded anyone, its all western mass media propaganda man, that doesnt say anything about the history of the region and how complex the problem is. Let me tell you that if Russia wouldnt accept Creamea's request to join it. Then Creamea would be an independent state. No way it would be in Ukrain anymore no matter what, after what happend in Kiev. It would on its own or with Russia. So you can keep promoting your oversimplified stamp about invading... It much more complex than this. Sorry for this offtopic, but its just astoning how mass consciousness is easy manipulated.
On May 11 2014 15:19 JieXian wrote: erm it's all in English and it sounds like generic so what's the point of this -.- I was expecting something with more "identity" since they are representing their countries.
Austria sure showed its identity. Lol And I remember Poland just like that!
Here you can check detailed results. Look for example at United Kingdom, Norway, Netherlands or Austria - viewers liked Polish tits but jury hated them
How the results would look if only televoting votes were counted: here
They should remove jury. Its useless and dont say same as people vote.
Here you can check detailed results. Look for example at United Kingdom, Norway, Netherlands or Austria - viewers liked Polish tits but jury hated them
How the results would look if only televoting votes were counted: here
So Poland got 10 points from Germany, but only 8 points from german viewers? What does that say about our jury?
Well, according to the results, your jury had Poland as 4th and the televoting had Poland as 3rd, so that was quite on par. The combined output was that Poland got second spot in Germany. Unlike in Sweden, where the televoting put Poland in 3rd, the jury had Poland in 17th and therefore, the combined rank was a meager 9th place and 2 points.
On May 11 2014 16:17 Micro_Jackson wrote: Didn´t watch because i think its stupid but i like that it is just a huge bitchslap for russia and its homophobic.
Dont you mean hetero phobic? lol
On May 11 2014 09:18 Hyperionnn wrote: Looks like "Pussy Dick" won this bullshit, that's certainly appropriate for such a bullshit contest.
Just goes to show you how much shock value is important in todays pop music.Music comes in second place. We already see the biggest pop stars like Beyonce and Rihanna making videos in thong. I guess next is real porn in daytime music videos. I dont mind naked ladies at all :D but this shit needs to stop before it completely ruins younger generations.At least some limits are needed.
On May 11 2014 14:38 Bunn wrote: This year's Eurovision was quite good. Not many silly acts, and the singers were all relatively good.
Russia getting booed at was great. Only one's I'm sorry for are the two girls, who probably were too brainwashed from living behind the propaganda curtain to even know what the booing was about.
Exactly my thoughts. There were mutch more worse years, yesterdays show was actually quite entertaing. I really like the song from the Netherlands, well deserved second place.
It's not a new phenomenon, WHEN exactly has mainstream music been about the music and without gimmicks? It's nostalgia for an era that hasn't existed for some time, if ever.
Can someone explain to me this whole Wurst thing? As far as I know trans people want to look like opposite genders (meaning guys wants to look feminine and vice versa). I get that. So why the heck does she has a beard? Females don't have beards. I'm confused.
On May 11 2014 18:41 JessicaSc2 wrote: Can someone explain to me this whole Wurst thing? As far as I know trans people want to look like opposite genders (meaning guys wants to look feminine and vice versa). I get that. So why the heck does she has a beard? Females don't have beards. I'm confused.
On May 11 2014 18:41 JessicaSc2 wrote: Can someone explain to me this whole Wurst thing? As far as I know trans people want to look like opposite genders (meaning guys wants to look feminine and vice versa). I get that. So why the heck does she has a beard? Females don't have beards. I'm confused.
It's just for show and shock value.
Welcome to the Eurovision.
So it doesn't have anything to do with gay pride etc. and it's just plain and simple dumb huh?
Oh, I'm sure there is some sub-meaning supporting LGBT rights if you look for it hard enough.
To me, Eurovision is just a purposeful freak show, and a vast joke. I may be biased, but looking at that, I don't see any deeper meaning, I just see ridiculousness.
On May 11 2014 18:41 JessicaSc2 wrote: Can someone explain to me this whole Wurst thing? As far as I know trans people want to look like opposite genders (meaning guys wants to look feminine and vice versa). I get that. So why the heck does she has a beard? Females don't have beards. I'm confused.
It's just for show and shock value.
Welcome to the Eurovision.
So it doesn't have anything to do with gay pride etc. and it's just plain and simple dumb huh?
No, the character Conchita Wurst is created as a reaction and a statement against discrimination that he experienced as a homosexual as far as I understand.
On May 11 2014 18:41 JessicaSc2 wrote: Can someone explain to me this whole Wurst thing? As far as I know trans people want to look like opposite genders (meaning guys wants to look feminine and vice versa). I get that. So why the heck does she has a beard? Females don't have beards. I'm confused.
It's just for show and shock value.
Welcome to the Eurovision.
So it doesn't have anything to do with gay pride etc. and it's just plain and simple dumb huh?
No, the character Conchita Wurst is created as a reaction and a statement against discrimination that he experienced as a homosexual as far as I understand.
On May 11 2014 18:41 JessicaSc2 wrote: Can someone explain to me this whole Wurst thing? As far as I know trans people want to look like opposite genders (meaning guys wants to look feminine and vice versa). I get that. So why the heck does she has a beard? Females don't have beards. I'm confused.
It's just for show and shock value.
Welcome to the Eurovision.
So it doesn't have anything to do with gay pride etc. and it's just plain and simple dumb huh?
No, the character Conchita Wurst is created as a reaction and a statement against discrimination that he experienced as a homosexual as far as I understand.
Tolerance for everything that seems different combined with clever corporate branding? I don't know, but I'm sure that the beard is provocative and it seems to work like a well placed match in a fireworks factory when it comes to getting attention.
Ask yourself if the song would win if it was performed by a normal girl instead of a gay/transvestite girlman with a tick beard ?
He/she won 99% based on his looks and shock value instead of the song.
Now that i look back I remember Isreal and Serbia wins and Ukraine 2nd place. If you send a gay/trasnvesite, lesbo or some freakshow you are guarantieed to get to top 3 no matter how terrible the song is.
On May 11 2014 20:22 SkelA wrote: Ask yourself if the song would win if it was performed by a normal girl instead of a gay/transvestite girlman with a tick beard ?
He/she won 99% based on his looks and shock value instead of the song.
Now that i look back I remember Isreal and Serbia wins and Ukraine 2nd place. If you send a gay/trasnvesite, lesbo or some freakshow you are guarantieed to get to top 3 no matter how terrible the song is.
Nah, Denmark actually sent a drag queen back in 2007 who crashed and burned pretty horribly (got sent out in the semi-finals) - the song was pretty damn terrible though:
EDIT: With that said: I do think Wurst won partly because of the 'brand'. The song was well performed, but it wasn't really all that outstanding.
Everyone hating on that guy/girl whatever claiming he won solely based on his shock value needs to take a good hard look on himself when it comes to homophobia. There's no way in hell that a performer in such an outfit gets +10 points from so many nations, east european included (no offense but they tend to be a bit less liberal when it comes to the alternate sexualities) with a bad song.
If you would just hear it on the radio is sounds just like a James Bond intro. There's no need to put a dick in there, but at least get your heads out of your asses.
For myself the songs that came closest to something I would willingly listen to myself were from Finland and Armenia, but I was very pleasantly surprised by the outcome of the contest. I guess Europeans are more tolerant than I thought.
On May 11 2014 20:22 SkelA wrote: Ask yourself if the song would win if it was performed by a normal girl instead of a gay/transvestite girlman with a tick beard ?
He/she won 99% based on his looks and shock value instead of the song.
Now that i look back I remember Isreal and Serbia wins and Ukraine 2nd place. If you send a gay/trasnvesite, lesbo or some freakshow you are guarantieed to get to top 3 no matter how terrible the song is.
That is not true. Homosexual/Bisexual/transvestite/It/whatever, is one thing to break you out of the crowd of prepackaged third rate pop you find at Eurovison.
The finnish "hardrock halleluja" won by being so differrent from the rest that people voted it in (probably also because of the costumes and the spite of the culture around ESC certainly cannot be excluded). Alcohol is free from Greece 2012 got a lot of votes (It probably also factored in that Greece said they didn't want to hold it for economic reasons. That is just baiting for votes!), parodies of ESC usually do well (meta-meta culture). Any publicity is good publicity and since any respectable coverage crew will go for man bites dog, the outliers have a huge advantage. The best way to avoid having a winner is letting a pop-court or the fanatics of the kind of music you usually find in ESC choose. It gets too bland, unless you are Sweden ofc.
On May 11 2014 20:50 Monsen wrote: Everyone hating on that guy/girl whatever claiming he won solely based on his shock value needs to take a good hard look on himself when it comes to homophobia. There's no way in hell that a performer in such an outfit gets +10 points from so many nations, east european included (no offense but they tend to be a bit less liberal when it comes to the alternate sexualities) with a bad song.
If you would just hear in on the radio is sounds just like a James Bond intro. There's no need to put a dick in there, but at least get your heads out of your asses.
For myself the songs that came closest to something I would willingly listen to myself were from Finland and Armenia, but I was very pleasantly surprised by the outcome of the contest. I guess Europeans are more tolerant than I thought.
The ESC is huge in the LGBT-community (heck, we even held a mini gay-pride the past week in Copenhagen in recognition of this). To call everyone who points out that Wurst probably had an advantage for homophobic is quite frankly disgusting or at best extremely naïve. Sure, the performance and song was good enough, but just like the UK it is frankly a little bland.
As a long time choir singer and a music enthusiast I am very disappointed with the quality of the winning song. I am thinking about competing as a male with silicon boobs and elf ears next year. Victory will be mine.
On May 11 2014 20:50 Monsen wrote: Everyone hating on that guy/girl whatever claiming he won solely based on his shock value needs to take a good hard look on himself when it comes to homophobia. There's no way in hell that a performer in such an outfit gets +10 points from so many nations, east european included (no offense but they tend to be a bit less liberal when it comes to the alternate sexualities) with a bad song.
If you would just hear in on the radio is sounds just like a James Bond intro. There's no need to put a dick in there, but at least get your heads out of your asses.
For myself the songs that came closest to something I would willingly listen to myself were from Finland and Armenia, but I was very pleasantly surprised by the outcome of the contest. I guess Europeans are more tolerant than I thought.
The ESC is huge in the LGBT-community (heck, we even held a mini gay-pride the past week in Copenhagen in recognition of this). To call everyone who points out that Wurst probably had an advantage for homophobic is quite frankly disgusting or at best extremely naïve. Sure, the performance and song was good enough, but just like the UK it is frankly a little bland.
Could be, let's compare the basis of our arguments.
1. Openly LGBTs are a fairly small minority. In eastern Europe it's probably even smaller. Even if they tend to watch and vote more than the average European, chances are their voting power is very limited. (Not to mention that the final vote is compounded by the public votes and some "jury".) 2. A drag queen has participated in the past and not gotten anywhere.
Vs
3. There was a mini gay pride parade in Copenhagen last week.
So yeah, those seem pretty weak grounds for calling my conclusions "disgusting" and "extremely naive". If there was an advantage, it was minor and certainly not "the only reason that guy won". Which is the opinion I criticized.
Here you can check detailed results. Look for example at United Kingdom, Norway, Netherlands or Austria - viewers liked Polish tits but jury hated them
How the results would look if only televoting votes were counted: here
Poland 5th place by voting. What's wrong with ppl? It was surely the worst song in the finals. Yeah, I get it if you appreciated their "show" for obvious reasons, but why waste your money on voting on that musical torture?
I'm generally a bit sceptical towards having a jury, mainly because it only consists of 5 ppl, but as long as they do a better job than the televoters, they deserve to stay. Hungary only got 10th place by televotes, and they had the song with probably the best musical arrangements. Thankfully the jury was knowledgeable enough about music to elevate it up to 5th place total. That's why the jury is a good thing. If quality doesn't get recognized, and songs like Poland's song gets recognition instead of Hungary's song, then more and more serious songwriters will just opt out, which will make the competition into more of a farce than it already is.
On May 11 2014 21:10 rudimentalfeelthelov wrote: As a long time choir singer and a music enthusiast I am very disappointed with the quality of the winning song. I am thinking about competing as a male with silicon boobs and elf ears next year. Victory will be mine.
Well, some european country would have to conquer the Bahamas first, so that might be a problem.
On May 11 2014 21:10 rudimentalfeelthelov wrote: As a long time choir singer and a music enthusiast I am very disappointed with the quality of the winning song. I am thinking about competing as a male with silicon boobs and elf ears next year. Victory will be mine.
Well, some european country would have to conquer the Bahamas first, so that might be a problem.
All he/she has to do is to compete for Germany, not Bahamas, and Bob is your uncle. There is no rule against having foreign singer/songwriters in your team afaik?
I read some article on Wurst, with people saying he was one of the most impressive voice of his country ; result his song suck, and he is not that amazing.
On May 11 2014 20:50 Monsen wrote: Everyone hating on that guy/girl whatever claiming he won solely based on his shock value needs to take a good hard look on himself when it comes to homophobia. There's no way in hell that a performer in such an outfit gets +10 points from so many nations, east european included (no offense but they tend to be a bit less liberal when it comes to the alternate sexualities) with a bad song.
If you would just hear in on the radio is sounds just like a James Bond intro. There's no need to put a dick in there, but at least get your heads out of your asses.
For myself the songs that came closest to something I would willingly listen to myself were from Finland and Armenia, but I was very pleasantly surprised by the outcome of the contest. I guess Europeans are more tolerant than I thought.
The ESC is huge in the LGBT-community (heck, we even held a mini gay-pride the past week in Copenhagen in recognition of this). To call everyone who points out that Wurst probably had an advantage for homophobic is quite frankly disgusting or at best extremely naïve. Sure, the performance and song was good enough, but just like the UK it is frankly a little bland.
2. A drag queen has participated in the past and not gotten anywhere.
Who was that?
Edit: Holy shit Estonias third place finisher 2013
Here you can check detailed results. Look for example at United Kingdom, Norway, Netherlands or Austria - viewers liked Polish tits but jury hated them
How the results would look if only televoting votes were counted: here
Poland 5th place by voting. What's wrong with ppl? It was surely the worst song in the finals. Yeah, I get it if you appreciated their "show" for obvious reasons, but why waste your money on voting on that musical torture?
I'm generally a bit sceptical towards having a jury, mainly because it only consists of 5 ppl, but as long as they do a better job than the televoters, they deserve to stay. Hungary only got 10th place by televotes, and they had the song with probably the best musical arrangements. Thankfully the jury was knowledgeable enough about music to elevate it up to 5th place total. That's why the jury is a good thing. If quality doesn't get recognized, and songs like Poland's song gets recognition instead of Hungary's song, then more and more serious songwriters will just opt out, which will make the competition into more of a farce than it already is.
the song is catchy, which is most important for pop music. They should have done the whole thing in polish though, english part was horrendous
Here you can check detailed results. Look for example at United Kingdom, Norway, Netherlands or Austria - viewers liked Polish tits but jury hated them
How the results would look if only televoting votes were counted: here
Poland 5th place by voting. What's wrong with ppl? It was surely the worst song in the finals. Yeah, I get it if you appreciated their "show" for obvious reasons, but why waste your money on voting on that musical torture?
I'm generally a bit sceptical towards having a jury, mainly because it only consists of 5 ppl, but as long as they do a better job than the televoters, they deserve to stay. Hungary only got 10th place by televotes, and they had the song with probably the best musical arrangements. Thankfully the jury was knowledgeable enough about music to elevate it up to 5th place total. That's why the jury is a good thing. If quality doesn't get recognized, and songs like Poland's song gets recognition instead of Hungary's song, then more and more serious songwriters will just opt out, which will make the competition into more of a farce than it already is.
I find the notion that there should be a jury in case of people voting wrong to be silly. Let the most popular song win and don't go by some arbitrary measure like technique. Eurovision has always been as much about the show as the actual singing, and as long as it has the big audience it has serious songwriters won't opt out because some sense of pride.
On May 11 2014 20:22 SkelA wrote: Ask yourself if the song would win if it was performed by a normal girl instead of a gay/transvestite girlman with a tick beard ?
He/she won 99% based on his looks and shock value instead of the song.
Now that i look back I remember Isreal and Serbia wins and Ukraine 2nd place. If you send a gay/trasnvesite, lesbo or some freakshow you are guarantieed to get to top 3 no matter how terrible the song is.
To be fair though, I still think Ukraine's 2007 entry is the culmination of what eurovision is. It's the song I'd show to people if anyone ask me what eurovision is.
Haha I love this contest really ;D. The music is terrible (in my opinion) and the performances are so creepy sometimes. It its fun to watch when on the right mood. Its just a massive convention for gay men all over Europe :D. A poor drinking game would be to drink when you see a woman in the audience ^^.
On May 11 2014 20:22 SkelA wrote: Ask yourself if the song would win if it was performed by a normal girl instead of a gay/transvestite girlman with a tick beard ?
He/she won 99% based on his looks and shock value instead of the song.
Now that i look back I remember Isreal and Serbia wins and Ukraine 2nd place. If you send a gay/trasnvesite, lesbo or some freakshow you are guarantieed to get to top 3 no matter how terrible the song is.
To be fair though, I still think Ukraine's 2007 entry is the culmination of what eurovision is. It's the song I'd show to people if anyone ask me what eurovision is.
On May 11 2014 20:22 SkelA wrote: Ask yourself if the song would win if it was performed by a normal girl instead of a gay/transvestite girlman with a tick beard ?
He/she won 99% based on his looks and shock value instead of the song.
Now that i look back I remember Isreal and Serbia wins and Ukraine 2nd place. If you send a gay/trasnvesite, lesbo or some freakshow you are guarantieed to get to top 3 no matter how terrible the song is.
To be fair though, I still think Ukraine's 2007 entry is the culmination of what eurovision is. It's the song I'd show to people if anyone ask me what eurovision is.
On May 12 2014 00:59 Wombat_NI wrote: I thought they got rid of the public voting because it was incredibly geographically biased?
It turns out that the jury can be even worse. This year they had to simply remove Georgia's jury vote due to vote fixing apparently.
...and as for the incredible geographical bias, obviously it is still there. It was so easy to guess yesterday roughly where the remaining three votes would go after the first result was shown after all.
On May 11 2014 20:50 Monsen wrote: Everyone hating on that guy/girl whatever claiming he won solely based on his shock value needs to take a good hard look on himself when it comes to homophobia. There's no way in hell that a performer in such an outfit gets +10 points from so many nations, east european included (no offense but they tend to be a bit less liberal when it comes to the alternate sexualities) with a bad song.
If you would just hear in on the radio is sounds just like a James Bond intro. There's no need to put a dick in there, but at least get your heads out of your asses.
For myself the songs that came closest to something I would willingly listen to myself were from Finland and Armenia, but I was very pleasantly surprised by the outcome of the contest. I guess Europeans are more tolerant than I thought.
The ESC is huge in the LGBT-community (heck, we even held a mini gay-pride the past week in Copenhagen in recognition of this). To call everyone who points out that Wurst probably had an advantage for homophobic is quite frankly disgusting or at best extremely naïve. Sure, the performance and song was good enough, but just like the UK it is frankly a little bland.
Could be, let's compare the basis of our arguments.
1. Openly LGBTs are a fairly small minority. In eastern Europe it's probably even smaller. Even if they tend to watch and vote more than the average European, chances are their voting power is very limited. (Not to mention that the final vote is compounded by the public votes and some "jury".) 2. A drag queen has participated in the past and not gotten anywhere.
Vs
3. There was a mini gay pride parade in Copenhagen last week.
So yeah, those seem pretty weak grounds for calling my conclusions "disgusting" and "extremely naive". If there was an advantage, it was minor and certainly not "the only reason that guy won". Which is the opinion I criticized.
Your representation of the basis of the arguments are incredibly flawed/misunderstood, but you probably know that already. With such terrible argumentation we really aren't going to get anywhere. Enjoy life.
Armenia best song, worst singer unfortunately. It became the favourite based on studio version, but was quite a lot worse live- 4th place seems fair I guess. Sweden IMO best live performance followed by Russia.
I didnt watch the show but I was quite suprised to see Austria win. It's like a joke that you can only hear once and then you dont care about it anymore. And i've seen that act before so its kinda meh..
I thought Ukraine would win easily for political reasons. But russia had quite a lot of points too..
UK audience voted Polish entry in FIRST place. The UK jury placed them LAST. Literally. Exactly the same voting pattern in Ireland. Public voted Polish entry into first place, but their jury panel put them last. And a whole bunch of other countries too, even 'liberal/feminist' ones, albeit the contrast was a bit less extreme. See more here (http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/eurovision-2014-voting-controversy-after-uk-jury-revealed-to-place-conchita-first--but-british-public-voted-for-donatan--cleo-9351644.html). From the article:
"A Eurovision spokesman denied this was evidence of a cultural disconnection between the popular winner and that favoured by the official judges "
Seems like some countries get screwed by the jury compared to the popular vote. I checked the last couple years for Russia. In 2014, tele-vote: 6th, jury: 13th. In 2013, tele-vote: 5th, jury: 10th. In 2012, tele-vote: 2nd (just a few points behind the winner), jury: 11th.
Eurovision is a people's contest. And it was that way up until just a few years ago when they changed the rules to include the jury.
F#CK THE JURY.
P.S. Shouldn't this be under Media and Entertainment?
On May 12 2014 06:45 Xiphos wrote: UK audience voted Polish entry in FIRST place. The UK jury placed them LAST. Literally. Exactly the same voting pattern in Ireland. Public voted Polish entry into first place, but their jury panel put them last. And a whole bunch of other countries too, even 'liberal/feminist' ones, albeit the contrast was a bit less extreme. See more here (http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/eurovision-2014-voting-controversy-after-uk-jury-revealed-to-place-conchita-first--but-british-public-voted-for-donatan--cleo-9351644.html). From the article:
"A Eurovision spokesman denied this was evidence of a cultural disconnection between the popular winner and that favoured by the official judges "
Seems like some countries get screwed by the jury compared to the popular vote. I checked the last couple years for Russia. In 2014, tele-vote: 6th, jury: 13th. In 2013, tele-vote: 5th, jury: 10th. In 2012, tele-vote: 2nd (just a few points behind the winner), jury: 11th.
Eurovision is a people's contest. And it was that way up until just a few years ago when they changed the rules to include the jury.
F#CK THE JURY.
P.S. Shouldn't this be under Media and Entertainment?
Never understood why they had jury's before. Now I do, thank you.
On May 12 2014 06:45 Xiphos wrote: UK audience voted Polish entry in FIRST place. The UK jury placed them LAST. Literally. Exactly the same voting pattern in Ireland. Public voted Polish entry into first place, but their jury panel put them last. And a whole bunch of other countries too, even 'liberal/feminist' ones, albeit the contrast was a bit less extreme. See more here (http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/eurovision-2014-voting-controversy-after-uk-jury-revealed-to-place-conchita-first--but-british-public-voted-for-donatan--cleo-9351644.html). From the article:
"A Eurovision spokesman denied this was evidence of a cultural disconnection between the popular winner and that favoured by the official judges "
Seems like some countries get screwed by the jury compared to the popular vote. I checked the last couple years for Russia. In 2014, tele-vote: 6th, jury: 13th. In 2013, tele-vote: 5th, jury: 10th. In 2012, tele-vote: 2nd (just a few points behind the winner), jury: 11th.
Eurovision is a people's contest. And it was that way up until just a few years ago when they changed the rules to include the jury.
F#CK THE JURY.
P.S. Shouldn't this be under Media and Entertainment?
They added juries, because they were tired of certain countries just sharing points with only their neighbors... This still happens, but to a much lesser extent then before, as most juries are actually less biased towards their friendly neighborhood countries.
Russia got absolutely shafted this year. Usually they get far more votes from the rest of USSR... If you had only popular votes, it would be a tragedy. The regional-cultural-political voting is already ridiculous. If you just let it be popular voting 2 things will happen: 1. Groups of people will create networks and push a "vote for x" because of reasons completely devoid of a musical dimension (It was interesting in Denmark when Dancing with the Stars had Allan Simonsen and a shits and giggles campaign of voting him to the final. It made the program change rules because he was so terrible and the campaign completely screwed the concept of voting for the best dancer.). 2. Things will get filled with even more sexual innuation and other not suitable for kids gimmickry to catch more votes. It is bad today, but you ain't seen nothing yet!
On May 12 2014 06:45 Xiphos wrote: UK audience voted Polish entry in FIRST place. The UK jury placed them LAST. Literally. Exactly the same voting pattern in Ireland. Public voted Polish entry into first place, but their jury panel put them last. And a whole bunch of other countries too, even 'liberal/feminist' ones, albeit the contrast was a bit less extreme. See more here (http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/eurovision-2014-voting-controversy-after-uk-jury-revealed-to-place-conchita-first--but-british-public-voted-for-donatan--cleo-9351644.html). From the article:
"A Eurovision spokesman denied this was evidence of a cultural disconnection between the popular winner and that favoured by the official judges "
Seems like some countries get screwed by the jury compared to the popular vote. I checked the last couple years for Russia. In 2014, tele-vote: 6th, jury: 13th. In 2013, tele-vote: 5th, jury: 10th. In 2012, tele-vote: 2nd (just a few points behind the winner), jury: 11th.
Eurovision is a people's contest. And it was that way up until just a few years ago when they changed the rules to include the jury.
F#CK THE JURY.
P.S. Shouldn't this be under Media and Entertainment?
You mean it was a jury's contest. Until 1997 everything was decided by jury. Fuck the people, they vote boobs.
Here you can check detailed results. Look for example at United Kingdom, Norway, Netherlands or Austria - viewers liked Polish tits but jury hated them
How the results would look if only televoting votes were counted: here
Poland 5th place by voting. What's wrong with ppl? It was surely the worst song in the finals. Yeah, I get it if you appreciated their "show" for obvious reasons, but why waste your money on voting on that musical torture?
I'm generally a bit sceptical towards having a jury, mainly because it only consists of 5 ppl, but as long as they do a better job than the televoters, they deserve to stay. Hungary only got 10th place by televotes, and they had the song with probably the best musical arrangements. Thankfully the jury was knowledgeable enough about music to elevate it up to 5th place total. That's why the jury is a good thing. If quality doesn't get recognized, and songs like Poland's song gets recognition instead of Hungary's song, then more and more serious songwriters will just opt out, which will make the competition into more of a farce than it already is.
I find the notion that there should be a jury in case of people voting wrong to be silly. Let the most popular song win and don't go by some arbitrary measure like technique. Eurovision has always been as much about the show as the actual singing, and as long as it has the big audience it has serious songwriters won't opt out because some sense of pride.
I don't think the jury ranks the songs arbitrarily. The main difference is that they invest much more into the songs than the average voter does, plus, all of them are involved in the music industry, so they have more refined tastes on average, which generally means they are more open-minded to styles that may not be that mainstream. The jury's voting is how the general public would vote, if they devoted as much time to the songs, and were as knowledgeable about music as the jury is. Well, that's what the jury strives for, and obviously that's not always what you get, but since they incorporated the jury I have always agreed a bit more with the jury than with the televoters, despite its flaws.
On May 12 2014 08:08 radiatoren wrote: Russia got absolutely shafted this year. Usually they get far more votes from the rest of USSR... If you had only popular votes, it would be a tragedy. The regional-cultural-political voting is already ridiculous. If you just let it be popular voting 2 things will happen: 1. Groups of people will create networks and push a "vote for x" because of reasons completely devoid of a musical dimension (It was interesting in Denmark when Dancing with the Stars had Allan Simonsen and a shits and giggles campaign of voting him to the final. It made the program change rules because he was so terrible and the campaign completely screwed the concept of voting for the best dancer.). 2. Things will get filled with even more sexual innuation and other not suitable for kids gimmickry to catch more votes. It is bad today, but you ain't seen nothing yet!
Imo, our girls got enough. I wasn't cheering hard for them but *what place was it actually* this 5-7 place is ok, i was expecting us to get 20+th because of politics ez. Well, they have already won, when they were childs, so i guess, they weren't sad :D Except for being boo'ed after singing and every point given. Danes are boring, stay classy if you can't approve other points of view.
Hungary imo deserved way more, as well as Suisse and Slovenia. I was a bit surprised by Netherlands in top-2 even after checking bookmaker's ratings but Austria on 1st place, ohwell. But in general, it was very high-level competition this time, not like usually with 1-2 good songs and 24 boring, i was pleasantly surprised. And also, this time there weren't many pauses, so everything was smooth, thank God.
And well, popular voting is good because people choose by themselves. Might be good, if jury can choose one set of points and people can vote for other, might solve the problem.
On May 11 2014 08:22 Yttrasil wrote: I'm curious, and this might be the correct place to ask. What is the name of the "host" for the Russian votes? She is a beauty!
I'm not sure if you check it, but it's Alsou. And she was actually at Eurovision as well, in 2000.
On May 11 2014 20:39 -Archangel- wrote: Then how did Russia win few years back? Or Germany?
Well, Bilan had to win in 2006 already, but back in the days, people prefered Lordi holy shit. And in 2008 there were Edwin Marton and Plyushenko, and he hadn't sung bad as well.
Germany, haha. Lena was op but Armenia was just robbed in 2010. It was probably contest with my favourite song from Russia.
All the Russians I know are very nationalistic and proud of their country. However, all of them also don't like how current things are now and want communism back.
On May 12 2014 07:57 ZenithM wrote: I'm proud of France's results.
I actually liked their song. That guy with the hair and the basecap was hilarious. I wonder if France just gets punished for their annoying refusal to speak the same language everyone else uses at the contest.
edit: talking about the guys reporting the votes, not the song itself-
On May 12 2014 07:57 ZenithM wrote: I'm proud of France's results.
I actually liked their song. That guy with the hair and the basecap was hilarious. I wonder if France just gets punished for their annoying refusal to speak the same language everyone else uses at the contest.
edit: talking about the guys reporting the votes, not the song itself-
Yeah I think the fact that nobody understands what the heck the song is saying doesn't help ;D
Here you can check detailed results. Look for example at United Kingdom, Norway, Netherlands or Austria - viewers liked Polish tits but jury hated them
How the results would look if only televoting votes were counted: here
Poland 5th place by voting. What's wrong with ppl? It was surely the worst song in the finals. Yeah, I get it if you appreciated their "show" for obvious reasons, but why waste your money on voting on that musical torture?
I'm generally a bit sceptical towards having a jury, mainly because it only consists of 5 ppl, but as long as they do a better job than the televoters, they deserve to stay. Hungary only got 10th place by televotes, and they had the song with probably the best musical arrangements. Thankfully the jury was knowledgeable enough about music to elevate it up to 5th place total. That's why the jury is a good thing. If quality doesn't get recognized, and songs like Poland's song gets recognition instead of Hungary's song, then more and more serious songwriters will just opt out, which will make the competition into more of a farce than it already is.
I find the notion that there should be a jury in case of people voting wrong to be silly. Let the most popular song win and don't go by some arbitrary measure like technique. Eurovision has always been as much about the show as the actual singing, and as long as it has the big audience it has serious songwriters won't opt out because some sense of pride.
I don't think the jury ranks the songs arbitrarily. The main difference is that they invest much more into the songs than the average voter does, plus, all of them are involved in the music industry, so they have more refined tastes on average, which generally means they are more open-minded to styles that may not be that mainstream. The jury's voting is how the general public would vote, if they devoted as much time to the songs, and were as knowledgeable about music as the jury is. Well, that's what the jury strives for, and obviously that's not always what you get, but since they incorporated the jury I have always agreed a bit more with the jury than with the televoters, despite its flaws.
What you say makes sense if the jury and the population at large would judge for example new compositions of Bela Bartok or similar music that certainly is difficult to enjoy first time you listen to it, but the whole point of ESC is to find out the most popular mainstream music for the mainstream. Sophisticated compositions need not bother.
On May 12 2014 07:57 ZenithM wrote: I'm proud of France's results.
I actually liked their song. That guy with the hair and the basecap was hilarious. I wonder if France just gets punished for their annoying refusal to speak the same language everyone else uses at the contest.
edit: talking about the guys reporting the votes, not the song itself-
I would very much appreciate it if singing in your national language in ESC was the norm. It's not like we're not bombarded with American music everyday... Having nearly all songs in English is so bland. :< An easy solution to not being able to understand the lyrics would be having them translated so that people can familiarize themselves with them.
Here you can check detailed results. Look for example at United Kingdom, Norway, Netherlands or Austria - viewers liked Polish tits but jury hated them
How the results would look if only televoting votes were counted: here
Poland 5th place by voting. What's wrong with ppl? It was surely the worst song in the finals. Yeah, I get it if you appreciated their "show" for obvious reasons, but why waste your money on voting on that musical torture?
I'm generally a bit sceptical towards having a jury, mainly because it only consists of 5 ppl, but as long as they do a better job than the televoters, they deserve to stay. Hungary only got 10th place by televotes, and they had the song with probably the best musical arrangements. Thankfully the jury was knowledgeable enough about music to elevate it up to 5th place total. That's why the jury is a good thing. If quality doesn't get recognized, and songs like Poland's song gets recognition instead of Hungary's song, then more and more serious songwriters will just opt out, which will make the competition into more of a farce than it already is.
I find the notion that there should be a jury in case of people voting wrong to be silly. Let the most popular song win and don't go by some arbitrary measure like technique. Eurovision has always been as much about the show as the actual singing, and as long as it has the big audience it has serious songwriters won't opt out because some sense of pride.
I don't think the jury ranks the songs arbitrarily. The main difference is that they invest much more into the songs than the average voter does, plus, all of them are involved in the music industry, so they have more refined tastes on average, which generally means they are more open-minded to styles that may not be that mainstream. The jury's voting is how the general public would vote, if they devoted as much time to the songs, and were as knowledgeable about music as the jury is. Well, that's what the jury strives for, and obviously that's not always what you get, but since they incorporated the jury I have always agreed a bit more with the jury than with the televoters, despite its flaws.
What you say makes sense if the jury and the population at large would judge for example new compositions of Bela Bartok or similar music that certainly is difficult to enjoy first time you listen to it, but the whole point of ESC is to find out the most popular mainstream music for the mainstream. Sophisticated compositions need not bother.
I'm not sure where you get the impression that eurovision has anything to do with popular mainstream music. The people that vote are not 'mainstream', it tends to be biased quite heavily to, for example, the gay community. There's nothing wrong with that but if you were to look at what is truly popular music by any objective standard (let's say album sales EU wide, downloads, or streaming plays) you wouldn't find any of them in the top 50.
Here you can check detailed results. Look for example at United Kingdom, Norway, Netherlands or Austria - viewers liked Polish tits but jury hated them
How the results would look if only televoting votes were counted: here
Poland 5th place by voting. What's wrong with ppl? It was surely the worst song in the finals. Yeah, I get it if you appreciated their "show" for obvious reasons, but why waste your money on voting on that musical torture?
I'm generally a bit sceptical towards having a jury, mainly because it only consists of 5 ppl, but as long as they do a better job than the televoters, they deserve to stay. Hungary only got 10th place by televotes, and they had the song with probably the best musical arrangements. Thankfully the jury was knowledgeable enough about music to elevate it up to 5th place total. That's why the jury is a good thing. If quality doesn't get recognized, and songs like Poland's song gets recognition instead of Hungary's song, then more and more serious songwriters will just opt out, which will make the competition into more of a farce than it already is.
I find the notion that there should be a jury in case of people voting wrong to be silly. Let the most popular song win and don't go by some arbitrary measure like technique. Eurovision has always been as much about the show as the actual singing, and as long as it has the big audience it has serious songwriters won't opt out because some sense of pride.
I don't think the jury ranks the songs arbitrarily. The main difference is that they invest much more into the songs than the average voter does, plus, all of them are involved in the music industry, so they have more refined tastes on average, which generally means they are more open-minded to styles that may not be that mainstream. The jury's voting is how the general public would vote, if they devoted as much time to the songs, and were as knowledgeable about music as the jury is. Well, that's what the jury strives for, and obviously that's not always what you get, but since they incorporated the jury I have always agreed a bit more with the jury than with the televoters, despite its flaws.
What you say makes sense if the jury and the population at large would judge for example new compositions of Bela Bartok or similar music that certainly is difficult to enjoy first time you listen to it, but the whole point of ESC is to find out the most popular mainstream music for the mainstream. Sophisticated compositions need not bother.
I'm not sure where you get the impression that eurovision has anything to do with popular mainstream music. The people that vote are not 'mainstream', it tends to be biased quite heavily to, for example, the gay community. There's nothing wrong with that but if you were to look at what is truly popular music by any objective standard (let's say album sales EU wide, downloads, or streaming plays) you wouldn't find any of them in the top 50.
Ah well, I suppose that is a good point. Why are no ESC contributions on the lists? Because the ESC music is too complicated to become popular in the mainstream or simply too bad? Or because it is marketed differently than other music? I must confess I'm not very into this whole ESC exercise and I watched it last Saturday more by chance. I do recognize that the whole ESC has gotten incredible media coverage, at least in Sweden, for many years now.
Unsurprisingly, the most attention-grabbing 'artist' won. ESC feels more like a contest between marketing firms than a music contest nowadays. These songs are written by specialists and the artists are marketed according to how eccentric they look.
On May 13 2014 07:07 maartendq wrote: Unsurprisingly, the most attention-grabbing 'artist' won. ESC feels more like a contest between marketing firms than a music contest nowadays. These songs are written by specialists and the artists are marketed according to how eccentric they look.
Nowadays? ESC has always been about the show, not about the music. It's simply a necessity considering it's on TV. I don't understand people who say this ruins the integrity of ESC.
On May 13 2014 07:07 maartendq wrote: Unsurprisingly, the most attention-grabbing 'artist' won. ESC feels more like a contest between marketing firms than a music contest nowadays. These songs are written by specialists and the artists are marketed according to how eccentric they look.
Nowadays? ESC has always been about the show, not about the music. It's simply a necessity considering it's on TV. I don't understand people who say this ruins the integrity of ESC.
The brothers Olsen who won it for Denmark some years ago didn't exactly have a great show - their song however was extremely well written (for an ESC). There have been times where song quality was the most important.
Honestly the winning song is ok, i don't get the hate. Would it have won when not sung by a bearded woman? Probably not. Did you expect some GREAT song out of the eurovision song contest? Probably not. Every decade there is like one actually great song but in general? Its just a streamlined pop ballad or even "pure" fun/trash.
Its a show and some "artist" that delivered a show won.
The interesting finding is that the various juries gave Austria everything from 1st spot (9 juries) to 24th (2 juries) and the jury votes are in general much more spread than the televotes that had Austria between 1st and 5th (with the exception of Estonia who put Austria in 8th). So with just the sample of Austria, the televoters all over Europe turned out to be rather of one mind as opposed to the juries. Funny that, eh?
On May 13 2014 07:55 Velr wrote: Honestly the winning song is ok, i don't get the hate. Would it have won when not sung by a bearded woman? Probably not. Did you expect some GREAT song out of the eurovision song contest? Probably not. Every decade there is like one actually great song but in general? Its just a streamlined pop ballad or even "pure" fun/trash.
Its a show and some "artist" that delivered a show won.
What you're basically saying is that Sweden would have won if the austrian singer had participated as "himself", rather than as his Conchita Wurst persona. Sweden had the other strong power ballad in the competition, and Austria losing enough points to lose the lead most likely would have given Sweden more than enough points to pass the Netherlands (and Austria).
So the question is, was Sweden's song better than Austria's song? I don't think so, although I think it was pretty close. After seeing the finals I thought it was between Austria and Sweden. They were not necessarily my favourites, although I like both songs, but I thought they were the only songs that were strong enough and accessible enough to win.
Austria would have been the odds favourite if it weren't for the fact that certain groups of ppl (who tends to be in abundance in the media) still thinks that we're living in the 19th century.
Anyway, the Netherlands getting 2nd position should be proof enough that standing out means squat. Yeah, they stood out, but on the opposite side of the spectrum, they stood out by not having a show. And you just have to take a look at the winners in previous years. Very few of them stood out, the one I can think of is Loreen, but that performance was very well choreographed and had a lot of artistic merit.
EPT![[image loading]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-B6Km2kVXsCY/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAABDE/l7uBteVQLIE/photo.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/yy121/kjellsundinster/Polandtalent_zps2b8735ff.jpg)
.![[image loading]](http://asset-2.soup.io/asset/7276/7277_209b_500.jpeg)
