What countries do you think should win in the upcoming years to benefit ESC the most?

[CC92]

^ Sceptical if the EBU would allow this.

 

[Mickey]

France would be a result like Norway's hosting.
I read some articles said that Italy, France or UK's hosting wouldn't be perfect statu. Because those countries don't care about Eurovision very well.

I have no idea what you mean by "like Norway". I thought 2010 was great.

France, Italy or UK winning could revive interest in the contest in each country. That's why a win for either would be a good thing.

Obviously, being British, UK would be my choice. We love Eurovision here, we really do. It's just not viewed as a serious music show. People think that (a) it's mostly populated by novelty songs and (b) you have to be from Eastern Europe/Scandinavia to win. A British win for a credible pop act could go a long way to changing that.

 

[Impressive]

I have no idea what you mean by "like Norway". I thought 2010 was great.

France, Italy or UK winning could revive interest in the contest in each country. That's why a win for either would be a good thing.

Obviously, being British, UK would be my choice. We love Eurovision here, we really do. It's just not viewed as a serious music show. People think that (a) it's mostly populated by novelty songs and (b) you have to be from Eastern Europe/Scandinavia to win. A British win for a credible pop act could go a long way to changing that.

I meant by "like Norway" is that Norway separated least budget to whole contest in last years and stage was very cold. There were only point lights at backstage. 2010 is a great year by songs. But to be honest, we can't say this is one of the best stage. Compare the stage with Moskova, Düsseldorf or Baku. Even Helsinki's stage had better technicals.

So I wouldn't be very hopeful when Italy, UK or France won.

 

[anto475]

^ Sceptical if the EBU would allow this.

Well French and English are the two working languages of the contest, that's why the results and rules are read out in both languages. It happened in 87 and 78 sure!

 

[Mickey]

I meant by "like Norway" is that Norway separated least budget to whole contest in last years and stage was very cold. There were only point lights at backstage. 2010 is a great year by songs. But to be honest, we can't say this is one of the best stage. Compare the stage with Moskova, Düsseldorf or Baku. Even Helsinki's stage had better technicals.

So I wouldn't be very hopeful when Italy, UK or France won.

When I said 2010 was great, I meant the staging. The lights looked cool. It gave the show a character of its own. I don't think a video screen is a needed for a good stage. 2010 also had great hosts and the best interval act this century.

I don't see the link with UK, France and Italy. These broadcasters have more money to spend than most. They're in the big 5 for a reason. I know France and Italy aren't as interested in ESC (UK loves it, just in a more complicated way), but I think they'd still want to put on a good show to the world.

 

[Impressive]

When I said 2010 was great, I meant the staging. The lights looked cool. It gave the show a character of its own. I don't think a video screen is a needed for a good stage. 2010 also had great hosts and the best interval act this century.

I don't see the link with UK, France and Italy. These broadcasters have more money to spend than most. They're in the big 5 for a reason. I know France and Italy aren't as interested in ESC (UK loves it, just in a more complicated way), but I think they'd still want to put on a good show to the world.

Most of people think that way only because of those countries have nice economical power. But this is not same thing or equal to good staging. This is all about taking care and take how serious this show. Some people think this is just an event show which takes a couple of nigts. Some people think this is serious contest like special award nights.

France, Italy, UK... Give money and take place in final with nice or non nice songs. This is not all about also taking best stage and building in a winning situation.

 

[Mickey]

Most of people think that way only because of those countries have nice economical power. But this is not same thing or equal to good staging. This is all about taking care and take how serious this show. Some people think this is just an event show which takes a couple of nigts. Some people think this is serious contest like special award nights.

France, Italy, UK... Give money and take place in final with nice or non nice songs. This is not all about also taking best stage and building in a winning situation.

I only talked about money, because you said the lack of it meant 2010's staging wasn't to your taste.

This is all way off topic anyway. This is about which winners would benefit the reputation of the contest, not which countries are hypothetically willing to pay for LED screens.

 

[Impressive]

I only talked about money, because you said the lack of it meant 2010's staging wasn't to your taste.

This is all way off topic anyway. This is about which winners would benefit the reputation of the contest, not which countries are hypothetically willing to pay for LED screens.

Sorry, what? We are discussing about benefits already. LED screen is one part of the whole contest benefits. Pleasure to the eye is important point, even one of the most important think in Eurovision (after politic voting problem stuffs). Why especially since 2010, visual effects are almost same you think? Because this looks the best to eye for now with little developments. So, this discussion is not all way off topic at all. Interesting effects, more fans.

 

[anto475]

Sorry, what? We are discussing about benefits already. LED screen is one part of the whole contest benefits. Pleasure to the eye is important point, even one of the most important think in Eurovision (after politic voting problem stuffs). Why especially since 2010, visual effects are almost same you think? Because this looks the best to eye for now with little developments. So, this discussion is not all way off topic at all. Interesting effects, more fans.

Well I for one am getting fairly sick of LED screens. I mean they've been a main part of the stage since about 2003 and only a few countries I can think of have used them effectively in such a way that it would have made a difference to the song. I loved the Oslo stage actually because they clearly tried to think outside of the same old "Let's just plaster the hall in LEDs and hope for the best". I mean stretching the lights across the stage-side of the stadium, and then extending them out back towards the audience brought everything in together and gave a great sense of belonging, something that worked really well with the theme, something that hasn't been done with the stage effectively since 2006 or 2003. As well as the innovation with the lights, they had the different things that dropped down from above, like the balls or the curtains or the rags, and it all worked so so well. Siren, Horehronie, and We Could Be The Same would have looked shocking and the quality of the song would have been taken away from due to the distraction of the LEDs. More LEDs =/= interesting effects.

 

[Impressive]

Well I for one am getting fairly sick of LED screens. I mean they've been a main part of the stage since about 2003 and only a few countries I can think of have used them effectively in such a way that it would have made a difference to the song. I loved the Oslo stage actually because they clearly tried to think outside of the same old "Let's just plaster the hall in LEDs and hope for the best". I mean stretching the lights across the stage-side of the stadium, and then extending them out back towards the audience brought everything in together and gave a great sense of belonging, something that worked really well with the theme, something that hasn't been done with the stage effectively since 2006 or 2003. As well as the innovation with the lights, they had the different things that dropped down from above, like the balls or the curtains or the rags, and it all worked so so well. Siren, Horehronie, and We Could Be The Same would have looked shocking and the quality of the song would have been taken away from due to the distraction of the LEDs. More LEDs =/= interesting effects.

I am not sure if you have noticed but you are saying that there might be a way in hardly to use stage performance as advantage to jury and voters even stage conditionses are not well. But I am saying that if stage gives us very nice conditionses to show a nice performance, song lovers would be very satisfed to watch contest show. And it would take more and more attention to other years. Just think about Lipstick... Seriously, didn't backstage and effects make song very attractive? This is completely about personal taste so I can't give examples healthy. But just try to get what I am explaining about. LED effects set this contest more domestic, more warm. Cold effects with point lambs and balls or something else... Really, sounds interesting?

 

[anto475]

I am not sure if you have noticed but you are saying that there might be a way in hardly to use stage performance as advantage to jury and voters even stage conditionses are not well. But I am saying that if stage gives us very nice conditionses to show a nice performance, song lovers would be very satisfed to watch contest show. And it would take more and more attention to other years. Just think about Lipstick... Seriously, didn't backstage and effects make song very attractive? This is completely about personal taste so I can't give examples healthy. But just try to get what I am explaining about. LED effects set this contest more domestic, more warm. Cold effects with point lambs and balls or something else... Really, sounds interesting?

no i'm not saying that the stage performance is a terrible part of the contest like, i mean i'd hate a radio show of the eurovision, but looking at the likes of Kuula or Crno i Belo or Love in Rewind or Follia d'Amore or even Party for Everybody, they would've looked so much better on a stage with minimal LEDs like in 2010, as the background really only served as a bit of a distraction. Actually My Heart is Yours is a great example because I think that if it was up in front of a massive LED screen, it would've just been a sunrise or something cliché like Sognu was, and it wouldn't have come across as well as it did with just the curtains and plain lights.

Yeah, backstage and effects do make songs so much more attractive, and songs like Milim and Sweet People and It's All About You are just three songs that demonstrated perfectly in Oslo that normal lights work just as effectively, if not moreso, than LEDs. LEDs are boring, you have to pick some kind of image to go behind them and they're always used on far too big a scale. Look at Euphoria, which had to use what looked like the television when there's no signal behind her in Baku, yet during Melodifestivalen the lights she used were perfect on their own. I'll admit that some songs do use LEDs wonderfully, L'Amore É Femmina, Unbreakable, La Voix, Randajad, Lipstick, Taken By A Stranger, to name but a few, but I feel that a little LED detox would be great for the contest, and I think a richer country that has won it a few times in the past would be able to do that. I mean one of the main things we've learned from Baku, and Moscow too I suppose, is that the new countries that win for the first time seem to go all out to try and establish themselves, and it just ends up looking gaudy.

 

[Impressive]

no i'm not saying that the stage performance is a terrible part of the contest like, i mean i'd hate a radio show of the eurovision, but looking at the likes of Kuula or Crno i Belo or Love in Rewind or Follia d'Amore or even Party for Everybody, they would've looked so much better on a stage with minimal LEDs like in 2010, as the background really only served as a bit of a distraction. Actually My Heart is Yours is a great example because I think that if it was up in front of a massive LED screen, it would've just been a sunrise or something cliché like Sognu was, and it wouldn't have come across as well as it did with just the curtains and plain lights.

Yeah, backstage and effects do make songs so much more attractive, and songs like Milim and Sweet People and It's All About You are just three songs that demonstrated perfectly in Oslo that normal lights work just as effectively, if not moreso, than LEDs. LEDs are boring, you have to pick some kind of image to go behind them and they're always used on far too big a scale. Look at Euphoria, which had to use what looked like the television when there's no signal behind her in Baku, yet during Melodifestivalen the lights she used were perfect on their own. I'll admit that some songs do use LEDs wonderfully, L'Amore É Femmina, Unbreakable, La Voix, Randajad, Lipstick, Taken By A Stranger, to name but a few, but I feel that a little LED detox would be great for the contest, and I think a richer country that has won it a few times in the past would be able to do that. I mean one of the main things we've learned from Baku, and Moscow too I suppose, is that the new countries that win for the first time seem to go all out to try and establish themselves, and it just ends up looking gaudy.

I get what you mean correctly. But if you ask me, Eurovision is not at this point yet. Eurovision still needs to earn fans, followers. In 2010, only 69 million people watched the show. Do you think this is good number for whole Europe? Now, Eurovision should get more fans with more interesting acts and lovely places for a couple more years. After everyone apperceive what exactly Eurovision is, we should try something hard, like cold stage with less LEDs.

Don't extrapolate that I am saying LEDs are everything. Of course not, but one of the most important thing is how does show look. For example, if award show nights which publication on TV could be without LEDs, without different colors or without a lovely show, would people watch? This is the same with Eurovision. Eurovision is just about to be flourish.

The part that I took in bolt.... LEDs are boring?? Back stage is as easy, simple as you said? You must be kidding me. I can get that you think a stage without LEDs could be better but if you tell me that LEDs are boring... I could really start to think you have phobia to LEDs.

 

[Nike]

I don't think any country should win because it benefit ESC more than other countries. The country with best song and performance should win. Ridicolous thread... It would be the death of ESC if countries starting to win not because the song but to make other countries hopeful that they can win or do well...

 

[anto475]

I get what you mean correctly. But if you ask me, Eurovision is not at this point yet. Eurovision still needs to earn fans, followers. In 2010, only 69 million people watched the show. Do you think this is good number for whole Europe? Now, Eurovision should get more fans with more interesting acts and lovely places for a couple more years. After everyone apperceive what exactly Eurovision is, we should try something hard, like cold stage with less LEDs.

Don't extrapolate that I am saying LEDs are everything. Of course not, but one of the most important thing is how does show look. For example, if award show nights which publication on TV could be without LEDs, without different colors or without a lovely show, would people watch? This is the same with Eurovision. Eurovision is just about to be flourish.

The part that I took in bolt.... LEDs are boring?? Back stage is as easy, simple as you said? You must be kidding me. I can get that you think a stage without LEDs could be better but if you tell me that LEDs are boring... I could really start to think you have phobia to LEDs.

Ahhh ok. Yeah no I'm just against what we saw from 2011 to 2012, that is to say, just a massive wall of LEDs. I mean there was no real thought put into the stage and I think that that could push away crowds a lot more if it was like that every year. Even thought 2009 was the same thing, at least there were moving bits and it was well able to change itself with each song, unlike say in Dusseldorf. Something like 2003 where there are orbiting screens of LEDs and there's more structure to the stage rather than just a wall of LEDs would be ideal. In short, I just don't want LEDs to be everything when it comes to the stage.

 

[DanielLuis]

What do you think would happen if a country like San Marino wins?

 

[Jim]

What do you think would happen if a country like San Marino wins?

Country that has the 2nd place will host...Italy? I don't think so...

 

[Stuff]

oops wrong thread

 

[A-lister]

I don't think any country should win because it benefit ESC more than other countries. The country with best song and performance should win. Ridicolous thread... It would be the death of ESC if countries starting to win not because the song but to make other countries hopeful that they can win or do well...

Well thank you for calling my thread ridiculous

You didn't get the point, the thread is 100% hypothetical, it's not meant to be dead serious. I totally agree with you that the country with the best song should win, and I do explain it in the introduction to this thread.

The whole point was to hypothetically discuss if some countries win would 'benefit' the contest more in terms of public interest, credibility etc. (if we put the songs aside for a minute). Of course it shouldn't matter, but unfortunately it does.

But yeah, I do agree with you that the thing that should count are the entries and not countries.

 

[Nike]

Well thank you for calling my thread ridiculous

You didn't get the point, the thread is 100% hypothetical, it's not meant to be dead serious. I totally agree with you that the country with the best song should win, and I do explain it in the introduction to this thread.

The whole point was to hypothetically discuss if some countries win would 'benefit' the contest more in terms of public interest, credibility etc. (if we put the songs aside for a minute). Of course it shouldn't matter, but unfortunately it does.

But yeah, I do agree with you that the thing that should count are the entries and not countries.

I don't think there's a country who benefit ESC more than others. Why? Because there will always be countries against the winner country. Will France victory bring Luxembourg back to the competition?? Maybe, but there's also countries that think France's victory is unfair. Look Turkey don't think the big 5 is fair. What would happen if France wins 2013? Germany 2010 and France 2013 after bad years for the big 5 should rather make Turkey even sure about that the voting system is unfair.

Western countries already complains about eastern only voting for each other. Then I don't see how a hungarian victory should benefit that much to ESC either. Czech R, Poland and Slovakia will come back? Maybe, but if the Western countries feels eastern only voting for each other they can withdrew too.

I think the best song and performance should win. There will always be countries against the winner country. We must accept it in a competition with 40 different countries and their music tastes and cultures.

 

[Terence]

I don't think any country should win because it benefit ESC more than other countries. The country with best song and performance should win. Ridicolous thread... It would be the death of ESC if countries starting to win not because the song but to make other countries hopeful that they can win or do well...

I see what you mean, but didn't Austria and Hungary both return to the contest in 2011 because it was staged in Dusseldorf? I seem to remember reading something about Austria, not sure about Hungary!