There are plenty of big events the BBC covers (in some cases as host broadcaster) that are heavily sponsored, a lot of them sport based, but there are some in other genres: Proms in the Park one example.
Although remember the fuss about the Sports Personality of the Year sponsorship?
Isn't this a "Eurovision" production though, rather than a BBC production. It may be taking place in the UK, and they may be the host broadcaster, but in reality it's no different to any other year.
As for tonight's result - I think they were pretty much spot on. Generally those of note got through, and those of note for the wrong reasons didn't.
A very enjoyable show this evening. The staging looked amazing - a much cleaner and defined set that past years I though. Moscow did look great but did start to get lost in itself as it was so big IMO, this evening's was just right. The similarities to The X Factor were obvious to us indeed but the use of 'MiStrip' is an ingenious solution by Florian Wieder to create a deceptive effect of scale - so good it would have been mad for him not to use it on this design!
I especially thought that the lighting design was suburb, I liked the 'heart beating' effect which appeared after each VT before the song would start. Small and subtle touchs which really lifted it from previous years' lighting designs.
I did think that a lot more could have been made of the camera angles/direction. Whilst there were only a few things that stood out as bloody awful (e.g. in the first few songs one of the central ped cameras kept moving its frame around for no apparent reason?!) there wasn't much excitement in the direction of the cameras. No shots (except the fantastic 360 degree shots that were obtained from the Spidercam) got me sitting up and thinking - oh, they've definitely put some thought into that. A shame I feel as I always look to the cameras/direction as something to impress me each year with the contest and, to be fair, always has done in recent years (except 2006!) with tight cutting and fantastically scripted shots.
The graphics were indeed a little lax but they do the job. Pre and post VT stings were great however and I really liked the idea of the heart representing a participating country's flag colours. Would be great though if someone could come up with a more subtle way of displaying the voting number when it appears mid-song as it does intrude a little on-screen. Having said that of course - that is the point of the show I suppose - to vote for songs!
One very odd thing was the displaying of both the graphics and footage in the recaps in cropped 4:3 instead of its native 16:9. Looked odd - anyone know why they did this? Nothing sprang into my mind bar for less technically adapted countries still broadcasting 4:3 Full Frame.
On the UK presentation front I thought Sara Cox was fantastic (loved the Paxman comment!) and great to see her hosting from the floor of the arena - seemed to have much more atmosphere than the balcony which has been used in past years. Whilst I thought getting rid of Paddy O'Connell was a mistake by the BBC, Scott Mills wasn't too bad at all and I'm looking forward to his commentary on Thursday.
I never really watch Eurovision for the music, even though I do find the odd song I like, but the scale and complexity of the event staging is really what catches my eye for the show and tonight I thought in general the Germans have done a superb job in hosting it. Roll on Thursday and Saturday!
Tonight was not, by the sounds of it, without some rather large technical issues.
I gather from Twitter that various countries around Europe, UK included, lost the commentator's feed repeatedly. Certainly there were rather too many occasions when Scott Mills ended up talking to himself when Cox should have been there to reply....
Tonight was not, by the sounds of it, without some rather large technical issues.
I gather from Twitter that various countries around Europe, UK included, lost the commentator's feed repeatedly. Certainly there were rather too many occasions when Scott Mills ended up talking to himself when Cox should have been there to reply....
Yes, according to DS some commentators were phoning in some of their commentary via their mobiles! Good job the BBC had Scott in London then!
The opening was a little naff (though it's only a semi) and it seemed to go on forever with pretty much the same shot throughout.
I wonder why it went over time so much?
Like it's already been said I was totally baffled by the 4:3 recap.
I really wish the BBC would stop their useless films they show in place of breaks in the show. They contribute nothing and you could probably find much better interview on the many fansites that you're already aware of because you're a fan and not an ordinary member of the public because the vast majority of people watching are probably fans who actually want to see the entire show. *breath* The live bits were bloody awful as well.
One very odd thing was the displaying of both the graphics and footage in the recaps in cropped 4:3 instead of its native 16:9. Looked odd - anyone know why they did this? Nothing sprang into my mind bar for less technically adapted countries still broadcasting 4:3 Full Frame.
According to the technical notes I read on the eurovision site a while back, broadcasting it in 4:3 isn't allowed as it would crop information from the screen - not sure what though because it all seemed to be 4:3 safe, but the specification demanded it was broadcast 14:9 in non-widescreen territories.
Hmm - feeling strangely underwhelmed. I'm a huge Eurovision fan, but the combination of a poor set of songs, a poor BBC Three show, and very dull staging made it just a bit "meh" this year.
Songs - well that's nobody's fault but the countries that selected them.
BBC Three - Why bother doing in-vision presentation if you have a presenter who can't do it, a location that means you have to pre-record, and terrible production ideas. There has to be a reason to do this kind of stuff. And it would be a good idea to have presenters who could remember a script (Did someone actually write the line "Here's what's coming up" into a VT that started "Coming up"...?) And putting Scott in London??? Ridiculous idea.
Both were appallingly out of their depth. Scott had nothing remotely interesting to say most of the time - was he hoping for twitter to provide his commentary? Sounded like it. And they really hadn't got a clue what they were doing at the end. Running their own credits - but with nothing to run them over apart from their own camera with Sarah Cox in front of it? They couldn't have run them over the host feed - that would have had a roller on it? What were they thinking?
Paddy O'Connell - you were much missed. And I never thought I'd say this - Sarah Cawood - so were you.
As for the event itself... Well it's difficult to judge the presenters that much because Scott was chatting inanely over them most of the time. I think the comedian who did the voting results was probably the best - and Stefan Raab can be pretty funny... Not sure about the news presenter - she seemed a bit out of her depth. In the green room bit she didn't exactly interact with the acts...
Excellent and huge LED screens, amazing set, great lighting. Stunning. In the wide shots. Which there were lots of. Just like The X Factor.
However there was no variety in the setting between songs - it was all flat and aircraft hangar like. NRK showed the way last year, with lots of different set treatments for different songs (with a variety of hanging elements giving you depth, something for the Steadicam and Jibs to work with etc.) LED can be amazing - but you can't JUST put up a large LED screen and call it a set.
However the cameras were too far away (so loads of it was shot on long lenses which feels very cold and distancing, and more like watching sport), and the audience were too far away. It all felt cold. Fewer cameras were moving, and there was a lot more done on zooms and pans. Disappointing. Expected better.
The graphics were OK, though at the end there was a constant reference to envelopes with no real envelopes and nothing remotely graphicised to look like an envelope... (And the BBC have found an HD caption generator at last)
One very odd thing was the displaying of both the graphics and footage in the recaps in cropped 4:3 instead of its native 16:9. Looked odd - anyone know why they did this? Nothing sprang into my mind bar for less technically adapted countries still broadcasting 4:3 Full Frame.
According to the technical notes I read on the eurovision site a while back, broadcasting it in 4:3 isn't allowed as it would crop information from the screen - not sure what though because it all seemed to be 4:3 safe, but the specification demanded it was broadcast 14:9 in non-widescreen territories.
14:9 is very much a 'UK thing'. I don't think I've ever seen 14:9 letterbox being used on analogue platforms (or digital for that matter) anywhere outside the UK, except on UK TV programmes that have been sold to that foreign broadcaster.
If a programme is not 4:3 safe, it's normally shown as 16:9 LB ?
No surprise the stage is designed by the same bloke who did The X Factor - the similarities are obvious. Great set though, but not a fan of the graphics. The scoreboard is very bland and the on-screen info covers too much of the screen - last years simple graphics, with no backgrounds, were much better.
Also ridiculous opening the voting at the beginning when the vast majority will not have heard the songs - that's just encouraging countries to vote for their neighbours.
They did that last year for the final - the theory is that it encourages people to vote as they see the songs rather than wait and forget.
Quote:
As for tonight's show - well, it seemed a bit, well, safe. Scott Mills doing a good job though, Sara Cox not so much.
Didn't think Scott was that good at all. Didn't really have much of interest to say, and felt like he was just making it up as he went along.
For those of us die hards he wasn't well produced either.
1. Norway isn't the first time Swahili has been heard at Eurovision. Anders Lundin, the Swedish host in 2000, welcomed viewers in Swahili 'just in case' they were watching. (So true that it may be the first time Swahili was sung, but not heard)
2. Lithuania weren't the first to use sign language. Latvia used it for "The War Is Not Over" in 2005...
Making a lot of this 'being my first Eurovision' is hardly a way to give yourself any Euro-cred... And the viewers of the semifinals are going to include a lot of die-hards.
No - I don't want anorak commentary, but if you say something, it does help if it's true.
As for Sarah Cox - she really didn't look like she wanted to be there. How recently has she done live TV? She seemed to have forgotten the golden rule of always expecting to be in-vision until you hear that you're clear. More than once...
As for tonight's show - well, it seemed a bit, well, safe. Scott Mills doing a good job though, Sara Cox not so much.
The end was a bit of a mess. Why didn't they just take the end of the programme rather than showing a confused Sarah Cox on the only camera the BBC have in the auditorium?
Really looked like either they were expecting a highlights VT that they had to drop because of the over-run, or they hadn't really thought about the ending... They couldn't have run a crawler over the main show feed, as that would have had a roller at the time (and the BBC have to get off that before the sponsorship stuff appears)
Definitely the worst BBC Three Eurovision production for a while. (Sarah Cawood on the sofa outside a few years ago - Moscow? - was badly lit and shot, but the content was kind of there.)
Paddy's commentary was in a different league to Scott's.
BTW - he's tweeting during the contests @Paddy_o_c