Some further reflections ESC 2009
May. 16th, 2009 07:54 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jawnbcWhat a brilliant Eurovision! The production was by far the best ever (save the hosts), but I really question the priority of a government that drops €30 million on a TV show, when its people are starving in the rural heartland. But I'm sure those folks are proud tonight.
The new voting system--50% jury and 50% televoting--had some impact, but the neighbourly nepotism was still abundant. However the skew was significantly lessened: the clear next step would be to bring this model to the two semi-finals next year. It certainly helped countries like France the UK...but probably less than sending something worth voting for. The only questions are how will the UK select an entry next year, since ALW can't write their song every year, and will Patricia Kaas's 8th place discourage other high calibre French artists from having a go? I'll scour the French press tomorrow and see what they--and she--have to say.
There were a number of winners though. First is Iceland, who, at a time things aren't going terribly well, took a risk, did things differently, and received a big payout. I'm pretty sure this is the only true ballad they've sent, and to finish second--a distant second, but second--ties their best result ever. And sometimes being second at the Eurovision brings most of the pluses and avoids all of the negatives. Like paying for a €5 million production when you're broke.
Azerbaijan is also a winner. They've figured out that your act only has to be top notch for 3 minutes. Rehearsing something for several months for a 3 minute gig (like being an athlete, who trains for years for a 1500m race) pays off--with the right team. I suspect Aysel won't be in Baku for very long.
Estonia also proved that sending the total package (song, artist, performance, staging) doesn't fail--even if no one understands a word of what you sing. From the mid 90s until 2003 Estonia was top 10 all but once; this is the first top 10 result since then. At our party it was all about Iceland, Estonia and France.
I wouldn't call them losers, but Chiara (Malta; 22nd), Noa and Mira (Isräel; 16th), and Spain (24th; 22 points) must be disappointed. Each is an established, respected musician who took on the Eurovision when they need not have. But under this new system the only crap entries in the final can be from the 5 pre-qualified countries. This year none of the Big 4 sent garbage: that pretty much guarantees some good songs will not score well. Or, in Chiara's case, a great artist with a so-so song won't.
Our party today was awesome. There was just over 20 people crammed into our living room, including 4 Brits and 1 Icelander. The pot luck was...pot luckish...but the vibe was so fun. We adopted a couple of ex-pat Brits who have been experiencing ESC withdrawal since moving to Vancouver. And today we had 2 ESC virgins. They'll be back. They always come back for more!
We experimented a bit with the furniture arrangements and it was a big win: we put the TV against the short wall, so we had a longer and narrower space for chairs and cushions. Much less climbing over people and better lighting too. Sietse and the team at eurovision.tv are to be commended for the great job they do with the webcast--it gets better and better each year.
The new voting system--50% jury and 50% televoting--had some impact, but the neighbourly nepotism was still abundant. However the skew was significantly lessened: the clear next step would be to bring this model to the two semi-finals next year. It certainly helped countries like France the UK...but probably less than sending something worth voting for. The only questions are how will the UK select an entry next year, since ALW can't write their song every year, and will Patricia Kaas's 8th place discourage other high calibre French artists from having a go? I'll scour the French press tomorrow and see what they--and she--have to say.
There were a number of winners though. First is Iceland, who, at a time things aren't going terribly well, took a risk, did things differently, and received a big payout. I'm pretty sure this is the only true ballad they've sent, and to finish second--a distant second, but second--ties their best result ever. And sometimes being second at the Eurovision brings most of the pluses and avoids all of the negatives. Like paying for a €5 million production when you're broke.
Azerbaijan is also a winner. They've figured out that your act only has to be top notch for 3 minutes. Rehearsing something for several months for a 3 minute gig (like being an athlete, who trains for years for a 1500m race) pays off--with the right team. I suspect Aysel won't be in Baku for very long.
Estonia also proved that sending the total package (song, artist, performance, staging) doesn't fail--even if no one understands a word of what you sing. From the mid 90s until 2003 Estonia was top 10 all but once; this is the first top 10 result since then. At our party it was all about Iceland, Estonia and France.
I wouldn't call them losers, but Chiara (Malta; 22nd), Noa and Mira (Isräel; 16th), and Spain (24th; 22 points) must be disappointed. Each is an established, respected musician who took on the Eurovision when they need not have. But under this new system the only crap entries in the final can be from the 5 pre-qualified countries. This year none of the Big 4 sent garbage: that pretty much guarantees some good songs will not score well. Or, in Chiara's case, a great artist with a so-so song won't.
Our party today was awesome. There was just over 20 people crammed into our living room, including 4 Brits and 1 Icelander. The pot luck was...pot luckish...but the vibe was so fun. We adopted a couple of ex-pat Brits who have been experiencing ESC withdrawal since moving to Vancouver. And today we had 2 ESC virgins. They'll be back. They always come back for more!
We experimented a bit with the furniture arrangements and it was a big win: we put the TV against the short wall, so we had a longer and narrower space for chairs and cushions. Much less climbing over people and better lighting too. Sietse and the team at eurovision.tv are to be commended for the great job they do with the webcast--it gets better and better each year.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-05-17 08:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-17 09:18 am (UTC)I however never saw the appeal in Azerbaijan's entry. I thought France's start position hurt them. If they had a late slot they could have done better. But maybe not. It's hard to sneeze at 8th place in such a mixed and competitive contest.
I can't quite wrap my head around how Norway got so many points. I mean, I can see the act's appeal ... and I can see how they won ... but to score so consistently at the top and with 169 more than the second place ... I cant quite put my finger on how Aleksander and Co captured that much that that much attention.
It was a very good show. The two hours of performance flew buy. The voting also went by quickly.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-17 10:51 am (UTC)At our party every country but two got points: nothing for Armenia and Russia.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-17 03:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-17 03:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-17 03:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-19 11:25 am (UTC)And I have to tell you - I LOVE the Estonian entry. I already have the song (along with the Moldova entry) on my iPhone / iTunes! :-)
And yes - the staging was truly brilliant - a technological marvel... But what was going on with that guys HAIR!!!!???? LOL
*hugs*