IMPORTANT NOTE: You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.
Well; we watched a very good contest; performers better than usual; staging excellent, sometimes spectacular; vocals good (especially the Slovenian girl); acrobatics (Jedward do like to bounce like Tigger); and exciting voting because there was not one single hit in the competition (I reckon the failed Norwegian entry is a hit).
The winner was Azerbaijan with a Swedish song bought at huge expense from a Swedish song factory (but still not a hit).
Done by two Munchkins - one of whom lives in London.
Now I'm not against foreign contributions - Gina G was Australian and Katrina a Yank - but as a Song Contest surely the song should be at least part composed by a national?
My original method of selection was to find a hit; that failed when Just A Little Bit only came 8th; so I realised it needed a strong performer too, so we won with Katrina. I avoided the "big star" route - why pick an Elton or a Blue who would look awful if they lost but anyway hadn't written a hit in years?
I am available if any country would like to win in 2012 - and, more important, host in 2013; there's huge profits in hosting, as the Krauts found out (but wasn't Stefan's reworking of Satellite ghastly? It was never a real hit song either).
I thought the rule was that the song writer had to come from the country they represented, this was how Celine Dion was allowed to compete from Switzerland. As far as I'm aware, none of the winners has been a hit in the uk since Dana International in 1997. In the heyday of the competition in the 70s and early 80s the winners always used to a hit in the uk, including Nicole's "a little peace" and milk and honey from Israel.
The Swedish entry this year is already number 1 in Norway, I believe. I think there should be a rule that none of the acts should already be established artists, that way they wouldn't get votes on the back of previous popularity (e.g. Blue)
i know your record in the business is somewhat greater than mine (zilch) but i have to say that satellite was a real hit song, and i never liked it
but how good is lena at delivering a song, few people could have got the dark, moody song taken by a stranger into the top ten
my thoughts on blue, it was a patchy performance and the staging to my mind did nothing to help show case the song, so for next year uk take a leaf out of sweden's staging or azerbaijan or spain or even moldova
norway was not a great performance and so paid the price
i thoroughly enjoyed the contest and was surprised that france was the favourite, i think any of the top 6 would have been a worthy winner
i do agree that the composing should be by a national and for that matter why not the performer also although this might put san marino and the like at a big disadvantage
not sure about juries, i would just leave it to televoters
In The Know wrote: robbiex wrote: I thought the rule was that the song writer had to come from the country they represented,
Thats why its called the Eurovision SONG contest, robbiex !
Your answer doesn't make sense. My query was whether it was necessary for the songwriter to come from the country they represented, not necessarily the artist (e.g. celine dion), however jks. I didn't ask whether they had to be from Europe.
Also if its the Eurovision song contest, then since when was Israel in Europe.
I thought it was a good show this year, with terrific staging, though I have to admit there were very few killer songs, but most of the really dead wood was lost in the semi-finals, so we can't complain.
Best of all was that the judging seemed to be the most "genuine" in years, with less apparent block-voting, and no clear winner until the very last minutes. I haven't investigated fully, but from memory I'm pretty sure that the winners triumphed by getting 8s and 10s from lots of countries, rather than 12s... I'd even imagine some of the losers in the lower parts of the top 10 might have gotten more top-marks than the winners, though probably just from their neighbours!
Blue did OK on the night, but it was a dull song that didn't come close to justifying the lack of a (public) selection process. And I really like the winning song a lot (the studio version is better still), though my heart was with the very retro Serbian entry, which never had a chance!
Azerbaijan are going to pull out all the stops next year, it should be a spectacular show...
Thank you David; a nice succinct answer for you Robbie! I'm trying to get Morocco (also EBU) to enter again next year; I'd love to organize it for them and get a winner into North Africa to revive the flagging tourist industry (due to Jasmine - also known as shit - Spring).
I thought televisually it was the best Eurovision in ages (loved the mad Moldovians); performances were terrific (especially Slovenia); praise to Jedward but especially to the effective Irish staging (super backdrop); and great having real cliff hanging voting - Sweden could have sneaked it at the end and joy that Italy's rather ordinary entry did so well; Italian pop is one of my favoutites in Europe and deserves to be back in the show.
I think people underestimate the importance of Eurovision. It means a great deal - all positive.
I actually voted for Slovenia. Not that I thought it would win, but it struck me as having a sufficient quota of niceness (nice performance, nice song).
Eurovision overall had a solid bunch of professional songs, although few that really connected. The French song stood out, although not necessarily for commercial reasons.
JK: Italy has better songs than this in the charts every month. You should tape the San Remo contest if that floats your boat. I have to plug my sweethearts here: youtu.be/R3wqTDt0nRE (I'll be There").
I read/listen to/ watch quite a lot of Hungarian media, and there has been genuine consternation over why they came 22nd when the pre-final feedback was so positive.
It's not my style of music but I kind of agree. I don't think they were expecting to win but... 22nd?
Kati Wolf was interviewed on tv this evening and was fine about it, saying she did her best and would do the same again. She also said that since the contest she has had quite a bit of interest from Scandinavia, Germany and the UK.
I do have Hungarian connections, but that aside I find it odd they finished that low.
Some odd results this year, but all in all it kind of reassures my faith in the contest as it was less predictable and therefore better viewing.
I loved the Moldovians. Bonkers fun. I've heard a few others mention that they loved it too and they are the type who wouldn't usually watch the show.
This year there seemed to be something for everyone.
At work today (non-music industry office) more people were talking about it than I've heard for years. Most people thought Blue were just relying on their previous fame and felt they were pretty ropey (song and performance) - the use of their own faces just had people laughing at their own self-importance.
kati wolf was average and that is not good enough when you are up against some great performers,
people will say that eric saade is not a very good singer, TRUE but then his song was not a power ballad,
it was an upbeat pop song with plenty of backing which covered eric's vocal limitations
kati did well to qualify for the final
Agree about the "love this show" rubbish; I'd change the way of delivering votes.
But interesting to see Eurovision thrashed the declining X Factor or BGT or whatever ITV rely on; ratings were almost double. I reckon sweet little Jedward were responsible for a lot of that; and Blue none of it.
Forums 
