Eurovision 2007 - Helsinki

Am I the only one with mixed feelings about this year's contest?

Whilst the final looked great on BBC HD in HD, and the lighting was improved over last year, the "spider cam" much improved (last year's was awful in comparison to the other cameras), and the LED mesh and panel screens very impressive, other areas were less improved.

I wasn't a huge fan of the Athens 2006 coverage - but the set had a feeling of depth and texture that this year's didn't. Kyiv 2005 still set's the standard in a lot of ways for me - in particular the actual TV coverage.

This year the coverage seemed slower, less dynamic and more distancing. The technocranes each side seemed to be less interesting (and more often in shot) than the Jimmy jibs used in 2005, and the lack of tracking cameras mid way back in the auditorium meant we didn't get the traditional, and engaging, through the audience tracking shots. They also seemed to drop in the very wide jib shot from the back far too often, mid song, distancing you from the performance (at times you could hardly see the performers on this shot).

At times they seemed to be aimlessly mixing between shots, and there were quite a few "wide / wide" cuts that weren't pleasant. Nice to see that they had colour viewfinders - as we did when one of the peds crabbed neatly into shot!

The set design was impressive in the wide shots, but seemed a bit impractical - the light colouring and LED screens highlit the steadicams and technocranes - and the large holes cut in the LED mesh to get performers and stage pieces on and off were a bit obvious and a bit ugly. The staging was also very flat - there were no height variations to the stage - unlike last year.

On the plus side - it sounded better than most contests recently - and in 5.1 it was interesting (though Terry seemed to be coming at me from all directions rather than the centre and front channels?)

I was left with mixed feelings.

Melodifestivalen does it better...

I can't comment on the HD aspect (I'm still stuck in creaky old SD) however, I did like the raised videowall walkway leading up to the stage, and the LED backdrop was well done (during the semi I thought for a time it was a backlit projection screen).

The problem I found, is the points you've mentioned. Over use of Steadycam to cover the lack of a front of stage dollyrail. Far too much use of the technocranes, and, too much rapid flashing lights on the backdrop linked into the main stage lighting (which is something that doesn't bother me - but I know can cause problems for light and photosensitve people) which O'Connell and Wogan failed to warn viewers about.

The Wogan commentary sound problem you also flagged up is interesting. I switched over to TVEi on Sky 802 who were also transmitting the contest, and I found their sound feed much bassier, and richer than the BBC's. Was this due to the Beeb's compression I wonder.

Finally, something that the viewers wouldn't notice, but Wogan highlighted. There appeared to be no scoreboard monitor in the commentary booths. From what Terry was saying, there didn't appear to any kind of monitor in the booths. Seems like the lighting and camera hire soaked up the budget for around 45 17inch flat screen monitors for each of the commentators to work of!

They had a monitor in the booth; see eurovisiondiary.com image
http://www.eurovisiondiary.com/images/stories/Apr26/11lg.jpg

However, I think the issue that Terry had was that simply that his monitor broke! I think what would have been better is a monitor with the broadcast on it and simply one with the scoring on it.

Wogan did warn viewers about flashing lights many times.

Was Ken Bruce in there with Wogan then? I know thats probably not the exact booth they were in however.

Yep - except that none of the performers were allowed to perform on this walkway area. Kind of a missed opportunity to add a bit more movement to the performances.

The lack of height variation on the set really made all the performances feel more uniform - as did the lack of foreground elements in tracking shots.



I don't think you want a front of stage track or rail cam particularly - a steadicam is great for the stuff where you're close up and can use a wide angle lens. The shots really missing were the mid-auditorium tracking shots that the rail cams in previous years (Kiev had two rail cams slaved to allow wide and tight tracking shots to be intercut very effectively) - these give you a sense of being in the audience as you look through flags and stuff - but the tracking means you never get your view obscured, get movement and get depth.



Think the problem wasn't over use of the cranes, more that they were not the right things to be used, they seemed to move more ponderously than the jibs of previous years, which may have been sited more effectively. A jib either side and one at the back is a usual arrangement - and can give some very dramatic fast cranes and tracks, but the technocranes just seemed to be slower and less dramatic, and were held on too long.

Both Paddy/Sarah and Terry warned before particularly flashy stage numbers though - so I can't agree there.



Not sure - it sounded OK in 5.1 on BBC HD apart from the commentary feeling as if it was everywhere not centred towards the front. May have been me. No idea how it sounded in stereo on BBC One I'm afraid.



There was for the semifinal - it was clearly visible when Paddy and Sarah were in-vision - and a commentary monitor is a basic requirement. If Terry didn't have one to watch it must have broken or been showing a feed that was less useful...



Nope - certainly there for the semis...

Doth cap in the direction of messers O'Connell and Wogan with a an appology.
(the warnings must have been whilst I was listening to our Spanish friends on TVEi jabbering away)

acrodding to this there could be over 50 countrys applying yo do Eurovision next year: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurovision_Song_Contest_2008

Well then I think its time we pull out of the show altogether, and that includes funding...

ah but the EBU also produces some Other TV work, But not alot !
the last one was this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitt_and_Kantrop

I also to belive the UK has Hostage the Eurovirson more than any one eles!

there Rumor going about that the big 4 should pull out and then there would be bugger

Bad news for the Eurovision organisers and presenters then - thought we normally left that cause of action to the likes of Iran and Palestine

Sorry - couldn't help it...

Depends whether or not next year's UK entry is better than this years.

Let me compare last year's UK entry "Teenage Life" by Daz Sampson with this year's UK entry "Flying The Flag (For You)" by Scooch.

2006 “Teenage Life” by Daz Sampson

Final score: 19th out of 24 with just 25 points.

Just about EVERYTHING was wrong with "Teenage Life", in my opinion. Quite frankly, it shouldn't have been in Eurovision. Let's take the faults one by one.

1) Rap in Eurovision? NO THANKS!
In my experience, rap never does well in Eurovision. Let's look at the following entries, which have included rap, from 1995 to 2006:

1995 UK "Love City Groove"- Love City Groove 10th out of 23 (76 points)
1997 DENMARK "Stemmen I Mit Liv"- Kolig Kaj 16th out of 25 (25 points)
2001 UK "No Dream Impossible" - Lindsay Dracass 15th out of 23 (28 points)
2006 UK “Teenage Life” - Daz Sampson 19th out of 24 (25 points)

Now there's a record for rap in Eurovision, isn't it? If you want to win Eurovision, forget rap, it doesn't work!

2) The girls’ costumes
a) The hats. Hats are a BYGONE in schools nowadays. Is there a school ANYWHERE where the kids wear hats these days? If anyone knows of one anywhere, please name it.

b) The stripy blazers. Blazers too are GOING OUT in schools these days. In almost all primary schools, and many secondary schools, the kids now wear sweatshirts bearing the school logo, not blazers. In fact, the way things are going, it's only a matter of time before sweatshirts replace blazers in ALL schools (primary and secondary), five years time at the most.

The combination of the hats and stripy blazers means that this was surely portraying an outdated image to the whole of Europe . The viewers of other voting countries (whether in the final or not) may well have thought we were behind the times seeing this. Face it, the whole of continental Europe must know what British kids wear to school these days.

Maybe if the girls had donned sweatshirts (bearing the Avy logo) instead of blazers, and dispensed with the hats, that would at least have portrayed a more modern image to foreign viewers entitled to vote for us.

3) The desks
They were the old-fashioned lift-up desks. Are they still used these days? Again, for the same reason as mentioned above, surely this was portraying an outdated image . They should have used more modern desks. On top of which modern desks without compartments below a lift-up lid would have prevented them doing the following bad thing.

4) Tossing the papers into the air
About two thirds of the way through our entry the girls lifted the lids of their desks, took out wads of papers and tossed those into the air to land on the floor. When I saw it at the time, it initially seemed like just a silly gimmick. Thinking about it, I can now state two things wrong with this:

a) The whole principle. If children did this in a real school (UK or anywhere in the world) surely they would be disciplined by the teachers (at least a good telling off). Surely this act was
(i) A bad example to children watching in the UK or elsewhere in Europe – they could copy.
(ii) Suggesting to viewers all over Europe how badly kids behave in our schools.
Maybe countries which gave us nothing were disgusted by this unnecessary stunt.

b) What was on the papers. On the night, I just thought it was papers, I didn’t notice what was on them. When I watched our entry again the morning after the ESC 2006 final, I noticed some of them had flags of other countries on. One could argue that was degrading the countries whose flags ended up on the floor, in effect saying “we hate you”. Did any countries whose flag was treated in that way take offence, and decide not to give us points on the grounds that “They hate us, so nul points for them”?

So you see, just about EVERYTHING was wrong with "Teenage Life".

2007 "Flying The Flag (For You)" by Scooch

Final score: 23rd out of 24 with just 19 points.

Well actually we tied with France on 19 points. The Diggiloo Thrush quotes us as having come 22nd.

In my opinion, a thousand times better than "Teenage Life". It was an ABBA-esque pop song, with Eurovision written all over it. I'll quote the two verses:

London to Berlin
All the way from Paris to Tallinn
Helsinki on to Prague
Don't matter where we are
Yeah yeah yeah...

Flying high in Amsterdam
Why don't you catch us if you can?
(Catch us if you can)
Now we're cruising in the sky
And we're singing it for you

Now LOOK how many European cities had a mention there: London, Berlin, Paris, Tallinn, Helsinki, Prague, Amsterdam. Now surely, that should have meant DOUZE POINTS guaranteed to us from Germany, France, Estonia, Finland, Czech Republic and Netherlands, should it not as Scooch mentioned the capital cities of those countries.

As for the chorus, it was catchy and immediately memorable. You didn't even need the BBCi lyrics up to pick it up. During the reprise on Making Your Mind Up night, after it was announced that Scooch were the winners, I sang along with the chorus. I sang along with the chorus and other parts of the song on ESC grand final night.

So there you are, claims that "Flying The Flag (For You)" was too cheesy are simply not true. It had ALL the essential ingredients to make it in Eurovision:

ABBA-esque pop song
Catchy, memorable chorus
Mentions of all those European cities

In short, it should DEFINITELY have finished top ten, certainly 6th to 10th, though top five would perhaps have been expecting a bit much. I don't think it was quite good enough to win, I felt Slovenia deserved to win (NOT Serbia).