Eurovision Song Contest 2014

[gorgik9]

It seems that smallslepyrascalcat's message to ALL the Nordic countries and all the other countries that voted 12 points for Conchita would be : "You have no understanding of musical quality!", and the contra-message would be: "Go to hell, damn bitch!"

But I just don't understand why there must be a necessary opposition between message and musical quality. Let's take an example - Billie Holiday's haunting song Strange Fruit is a song with a message if there ever was, but if you say, that because of this message the musical quality must be deminished I just don't understand and I think you're dead wrong.

Now, the Lady Day will sing the blues...

 

[smallsleepyrascalcat]

ihno, you are missreading the results on the webpage...

And what I say is that the song was a bad copy of every James Bond song and Conchita Wurst is not the best performer out there. But the performance and the performer were rewarded. If you haven't missed it yet, the composer and the writer are still on display at the ESC because the original intention of it was that it's about the song and not about a transvestite performing it, making a statement against homophobes. That's what the ESC once was about. Music. Conchita Wurst did not win because she sang the best song.

 

[klimt]

And what about the 2 poor points for the French Moustache

 

[ihno]

ihno, you are missreading the results on the webpage...

And what I say is that the song was a bad copy of every James Bond song and Conchita Wurst is not the best performer out there. But the performance and the performer were rewarded.

That's your opinion, nothing more. And I'm capable of understanding a chart.
And as for the music: Bad music - it's the Grand Prix. It's all either a copy or mediocre. And every second James Bond song is a bad copy of a James Bond Song.

@klimt: The big countries don't have the best chances anyway but that song was really bad, wasn't it?

 

[Mari0]

Ermmm... Last year vote was 50% Jury, not 33%...

 

[ihno]

@Mari0: Ok.
In the national pre-qualifications the jury had 33% if I read it correctly. A band named "The Brassbandera" (or so) was preferred by the public while the jury preferred Cascada and so they were sent in the end.

 

[haiducii]

Tinkara @ ESC 2015

I'm sure next year, we'll do it better

 

[Now&Forever]

1.Austria - Yes !! Dramatic, elegant and powerful. Beautifully staged. A worthy winner. I had placed a bet (before the semi) that she would reach the top 3 of the final, so I won €166.25. Thankyou Conchita !:thumbs up:
2.Netherlands - Thrilled for them to do so well. Nice to see that country music can do well in the contest.
3.Sweden - Stunning ! It sounds like the sort of song Celine Dion would've done, when she was having her biggest hits.
4.Armenia - The first half of the song is a bore:yawn:, but he sounds great when it picks up pace. After his so called jokes about Conchita, I'm happy that she got further than him.
5.Hungary - I thought this might win, though 5th is still so good. Their highest ever placing is 4th, so would've loved for this to have reached top 3.
6.Ukraine - there are 2 songs that reached the top 10 that didn't deserve to imo - and this is one of them.
7.Russia - this is the other. Neither are bad songs, just ok, not vocally impressive, and way too gimmicky staging.
8.Norway - The cd version is so much better , but I'm pleased he got into the top 10.
9.Denmark - very polished performance, but the flag was too much. Hate the ''scoobydoobydobdopdiibitdie'' bits, and I thought he got the lyrics wrong - when he sings ''Katy Perry, she's so sexy'', surely he meant to say ''she's so over rated, and is nothing without autotune and photoshop'' ?!
10.Spain - I love the Spanish parts, but the English lyrics needed more than repeating the title over and over. Still, I loved it. Powerful voice, and she really sells the song. They should have got her to come back on later and sing the UK entry too.
11.Finland - the song sounds like Coldplay or The Script when they're not crap, but with a less anoying front man than Danny O'Donoghue. The singers voice sounds wrecked by the end of it though.
12.Romania - it's just not as good as Playing With Fire is it ! Unfair to compare, but there you go. The staging must have been thought up by a lunatic. A hulahoop piano and a hologram ? WTF?:?
13.Switzerland - if it had been televote only, it would've been 7th. I love it but I think 13th is about right, as it's more talking than singing.It's all about the whistling though, isn't it. I have been whistling that for about a month now.
14.Poland - this should've been 25th. The pretty girl (not the singer, nor dancer, just ....a pretty girl) who churned butter was trying so hard to be sexy that it just looked desperate.:blushing:
15.Iceland - I love this ! Great message ''let's do away with prejudice, don't discriminate , tolerance is bliss, we've got get together on this, cross this problem off our list..''. Maybe the voters couldn't see past the mad clothes and wacky performance, and so the message was lost ?
16.Belarus - the Robin Thicke clone. I hated this the first time I heard it. It was near the bottom of 37 songs, but it's moved up to about midway now. Well performed.
17.UK - And the Oscar goes to...! She looked like an Academy Award. Still, a step in the right direction - I like the singers voice and I like the tune. Not keen on the lyrics or title, or the crap on her hands. She gave it welly in the premiere, but lacked oomph on the big night. Very weak and limp when it mattered. She was lucky to get as high as 17th,when better songs with far stronger vocal performances (Montenegro,Azerbaijan,Malta,San Marino,Slovenia) scored less.
18.Germany - this was ok. Ok song. Ok singer. It's just.....there. It's forgettable.It was the bookies favorite to come 26th. I would put it about 24th.
19.Montegro - should've lost the skater, and maybe give us a verse in English to improve his chances. Still, well done on getting your country to the final for the first time !:applause:
20.Greece - leave the trampoline backstage with the rapper tied to it. Neither the trampoline nor the rapper were needed. Better without them. Good singer, good song. Bad rapper, bad gimmick.
21.Italy - if there's a tune here, I'm struggling to find it. She looked very angry during the performance, maybe she couldn't find it either ?
22.Azerbaijan - this is becoming one of my favourites on the cd, yet I don't like the performance at all. Red dress, lost in a sea of red background, and the trapeze artist was a distraction.
23.Malta - if this was a jury vote only, it would have came 7th. The public weren't so keen. I like it, but maybe not immediate enough for the viewers. It's a grower.
24.San Marino - the song is seen by others as old fashioned, but I prefer to say 'classic'. For her to reach the final (at last) was a triumph !:heart:
25.Slovenia - I'd lose the shoulder pads, but other than that, I wouldn't change a thing. She sings well, she looked good, I loved the swirls going 'round on the floor.A success when compared to last yrs result.
26.France - I like this on cd, but seeing it live, it didn't work. It had to come last.

 

[klimt]

@klimt: The big countries don't have the best chances anyway but that song was really bad, wasn't it?

That was not Soooo bad.. that was a song not to take things...
Here in France we think all that Eurovision Song contest is nothing but old Fashioned Shit...

 

[Mari0]

That was not Soooo bad.. that was a song not to take things...
Here in France we think all that Eurovision Song contest is nothing but old Fashioned Shit...

Then that's the reason why you (almost) always do so bad (lately) )

 

[ihno]

I must say I find the news afterwards more entertaining that the show itself.

Turkey has left Eurovision and won't participate in the future again because of it's indecency.

And now to my fave topic: the juries: :thumbs up:

Georgia's jury has been disqualified because of cheating and the officials are actually deciding about banning Georgia for three years:
http://anonym.to/http://www.faz.net...en-soll-beim-esc-betrogen-haben-12937472.html


Since some seem to think I’m too stoopid to understand some charts I have found some calculation from somebody else, a mathematician as it seems. He also writes for “Der Spiegel”. Here in this article (jirmen, sorry) are some graphics, in the middle is a graphic which shows
a) the jury results alone
b) the televote alone and
c) the result as it came out and as we’ve seen it.
http://anonym.to/http://hdambeck.de/2014/05/11/wer-hat-eigentlich-den-esc-2014-entschieden/

So if you count all 37 juries (36, lol) together, Austria would still have won, followed by the Netherlands. Then there’s a difference between Sweden and Armenia.
So who’s the big loser? Poland is. And why?

Interestingly the negative result for Poland does have a “political” background. The juries seemed to have found it too sexist to give votes to it (except for the german jury who seemed to appreciate wobbling titties). See the UK.
http://anonym.to/http://www.indepen...-too-far-for-uks-eurovision-jury-9360899.html
So much for the myth that they would only judge the “songs”.

Germany's jury is not the only one under a big shitstorm, it's the same in the UK. Here it is about Poland:
http://anonym.to/http://www.indepen...h-public-voted-for-donatan--cleo-9351644.html

In Germany there is much criticism about the jury. It should be about the broadcast station NDR, who selected the jury. Ralph Siegel, an ESC veteran pointed out that the German jury had no real connection to the ESC at all and would be too narrow-minded and only support their “own” music.
http://anonym.to/http://www.focus.d...he-esc-jury-war-nicht-neutral_id_3837862.html

And the selection is highly questionable. One member of the jury is an 18 year old young woman, just starting a musical career and has made one album recently. She’s a “youtube-celebrity”. She joined the national Pre-Selection but failed in the first round. That’s all the “expertise” she brings with. Poor girl.

Some other only seemed to have used it promote his new cd, which he held into the camera once or twice.

Sido, a Rapper, was another jury member. The NDR should have replaced him. His participation can be viewed as a breach of rules. No jurymember must have connections to any song or participant.
http://anonym.to/http://www.eurovis...gContest_2014_Rules_Public_ENG_20.09.2013.pdf
Sido worked for the austrain television, where he met Wirth in casting shows, where he was a juror. I think you call that a connection.
And it’s not a surprise that Sido didn’t like Wurst. This “representative” is not only known for several law suits against him. One was about him throwing paving stones at an elderly women. He paid 14.000 € to get rid of it.
http://anonym.to/http://www.spiegel...er-sido-muss-14-000-euro-zahlen-a-654795.html

No, he’s also known for several homophobic comments, not just in general, but also about Wirth. In 2011 he compared the Wurst-character to a mere circus attraction, like you had bearded women in cages and you paid 5 gold pieces (lol, I guess it was cheaper) to see her. ("Ich verstehe, dass Frau Wurst ankommt. Früher im Zirkus gab’s ja auch die Frau mit Bart - im Käfig. Da konntest du fünf Goldstücke zahlen und sie dann sehen. Hier kriegt ihr sie umsonst, nur für die ORF-Gebühren halt")
Maybe he has changed his mind, he’s not throwing stones at old women any more too, lol.

Another big difference is Azerbaijan, who’s entry got many more votes by the juries than by the voters. Well, I posted that before, Azerbaijan is said to buy votes:
http://anonym.to/http://www.indepen...ery-after-azerbaijan-allegations-8835367.html
I’ve said before that the neighbor-voting is still an issue with the juries. See Russia, Belarus f.e.


“These are the rules of the game. Of course sometimes there are discrepancies between the jury and tele-vote but this is what makes the whole process even more exciting”, one Eurovision offical said afterwards.
I find this statement a little arrogant and insulting. It reminded me first of Louis XVI, who said something like that to the Thrid Estate in the National assembly in 1789. But seriously: People pay their telephone bills and in the end they pay for the whole thing too. But if it comes to the decision it’s a different thing: “Yes you can call but in the end we do, what we want”

I guess the amount of criticism is no surprise and will make the ESC change the rules again. Maybe not next year but sooner or later it might become a problem if people start to think that their calls are nothing worth.

And as for the winner song: At least I still have the melody in my mind, this is more than I can say about most other entries.

 

[haiducii]

@ihno: Excellent post! Thank you for taking the time to share your views on ESC !

@german jury (incl. Sido): Real music ''experts''

 

[slimjim]

Well I didn't watch it but heard there was a similar issue with the UK jury.

I have since heard an interview with one of the UK jury members who stated that they (the jury) completed their voting the day before the final, based on the final rehearsals... so when they vote they cannot know how the 'phone votes will turn out.

http://refhide.com/?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-27371264

 

[ihno]

Well I didn't watch it but heard there was a similar issue with the UK jury.
I have since heard an interview with one of the UK jury members who stated that they (the jury) completed their voting the day before the final, based on the final rehearsals... so when they vote they cannot know how the 'phone votes will turn out.

Nobody said that they would have known the results of the tele-vote before making their decisions.

In Germany people want to know, why there is a jury at all, why those five were selected (and not somebody else with a connection to the whole thing), who from the TV station was resposible for that decision etc. There are also suggestions sometimes: let the audience vote the jury in the first place or give the jury less importance. Not 50% but 33% or less. Most want to get rid of the jury-system at all (which is only five years old or so).

There is a similarity: People want to feel represented by their jury but in Germany and the UK the people don't feel represented. (Maybe that goes for other states too, I don't speak polish to check their newspaper f.e.)
Both UK and Germany belong to the "big five". So the ESC needs the support of the public in these countries. If they lose it there might be protests in the next year. In Germany, as said, it's the second time in a row people don't understand the jury.

The ESC is not really a "musical contest", where it goes about the music. Some people watch it as a kind of "bad taste" to see silly artists with spin wheels like Ukraine. They don't watch it to see good new compositions.
Others are tradionalists and watch it for the cheese, they like harmless harmonic stuff like in the past. And it's for the audience in the end.

 

[gorgik9]

@ihno
I have no other opinion than Haiducii : Brilliant post:thumbs up::thumbs up::thumbs up:

 

[gorgik9]

A bit about jury voting and televoting in ESC.

In the beginning (which was 1956) when God (called European Broadcasting Union, EBU) created the ESC, there was nothing but juries. Televoting or some other method for popular voting just didn't exist, and this could be called the Old Testament of ESC.

The New Testament started in 1997, when five countries (Schweiz, Sweden, Great Britain, Germany and Austria) got permission from the EBU to test televoting in the ESC, and since this worked very well, televoting was made a standard procedure in 1998.

So we've had juries in the ESC since 1956 and nothing but juries until 1996. On the question of why we have juries today, I think the importance of traditionalist conservatism shouldn't be underestimated: We've always had juries, let's continue having juries....

 

[ihno]

No, the juries with 50% were introduced in 2009, not 1998. The rules have then been changed again in 2010, 2012 and 2013... if wikipedia is right.

 

[slimjim]

Mmm, a bearded singing transvestite..... I think it may have been done before :rofl::rofl:

 

[ihno]

 

[gorgik9]

No, the juries with 50% were introduced in 2009, not 1998. The rules have then been changed again in 2010, 2012 and 2013... if wikipedia is right.

For some strange reason you're trying to correct me on a point which I didn't say anything about: I wanted to trace a swift sketch of the big picture, concerning jury vs. popular televoting; televoting was introduced as a test in five countries in 1997 and made a standard procedure from 1998 on.

I didn't say ANYTHING about the proportion between jury and televoting and the differing percentage from one year to another. I was, as I said, going for the bigger picture.