Eurovision 2011 - 10/12/14 May 2011

How did you hear from Graham Norton? Did he even see my comments / remarks on here?

An enjoyable contest in many ways, though the interval act was a real low point for me - on a par with Aqua IMO. Surely anyone can book a band to appear and do a couple of numbers. I warmed to the set, though I agree too many of the shots were too distant. I liked the streamers at the end - nice touch, though it did appear to cause a problem for one of the crane/wire cameras! Pleased for the result in many ways - though I personally think Sweden wuz robbed. A decent enough song won, though it was a bit pappy. Amazed with Italy's result - a bizarre entry IMO. The voting seemed slick to me - far less congratulatory chat between host and contributor I think, it'was getting very tiresome listening to a parade of people saying thanks for a wonderful show...

Just watching the final on SBS TV, and I must say what an excellent job Germany did with the venue, the hosts and of course the songs.

It's also great they Australia did get a mention from one of the hosts! Pity we can't compete in Eurovision, but maybe the Asia-Pacific Song Contest will be resurrected.

If acres of flat LED isn't a stage, what is it?

I don't really get why people are amazed with that. Graham pointed out a couple of acts during the night that might do well as they were in the only act in that genre, and Italy was surely the same.

Massive ratings last night - 9.5m, highest figures since 1999, with 12m watching the voting.

Talk of pulling out of Eurovision comes up every year, usually in the Daily Mail as a way of accusing the BBC of wasting money.

Truth is, Eurovision is some of the cheapest TV around, and our participation every year costs less than 1p of each licence fee. Plus, the BBC's membership of the EBU comes with other benefits such as satellite links for sport.

We should stop throwing our toys out of the pram when we don't win by entering dross. We've won a few times, some countries have never won. We'll win again when we enter a decent act. The block voting accusations are nonsense too, in the last ten years some big Western countries have won like Greece and Germany.



Twitter and Facebook are free to join and millions of people are already on them. It makes absolutely sense for the BBC to use a platform that their viewers are already engaging with to allow them to get in touch, rather than waste the licence fee developing their own version of Twitter that nobody would use. Plus, every time the Twitter and Facebook addresses were mentioned, so was the BBC Eurovision site where people could also leave comments.

I'm a big Eurovision fan, but even I'm starting to think it's time we withdrew from this. Not just because we " lost ", because compared to a lot of recent contests ( with the except of the Jade year ) we've done very well. But even if we entered what the majority of us perceived as a " good song " would we have any chance of coming in the top three? I didn't think Blue's performance was as great as the rehearsals, but it had a positive vibe about it from the start of the promotion and yet it failed to get a great number of votes.

If we are going to remain in this, I think the BBC should go back to letting anyone write a song and any act enter. There's bound to be hidden talent somewhere....

BTW agreed with G Norton that Spain got a raw deal in the points.

Personally felt the same about Switzerland and Finland too...

Oh, hello again

If we entered a good song yes we would have a good shot. Trouble is the BBC became obsessed about entering a "good Eurovision song" at a time when Eurovision was actually evolving and countries upping their game.

Sixteen winners in sixteen years is absolute proof the contest isn't dominated by block voting. Indeed the obvious reason why the UK doesn't do as well as it did beforehand is quite obvious - allowing all countries to sing in English. The UK and Ireland (and Malta) kind of got points by default as for many across Europe it would have been one of the few songs people actually understood on the night. I'd guess last night almost 20 of the songs were in English - indeed apart from Italy I think most of the Top 10 were sung in English.

All in all, a distinctly lacklustre staging this year I feel. As others have mentioned, the considerable distance of the cameras from the stage was by far the biggest hindrance to enjoying the event. It lacked the clarity, engagement and personability so important for a production of this kind, creating a cold and distant feel for the whole event. The resulting camera operation was less than desirable, with slight nudges much more pronounced in telephoto shots and the pixelation of the LED screen constantly brought into grossly unflattering focus. Jib arm operation lacked dynamisim, while there was an over-reliance on boring mid-shots taken from three miles away and truly awful tracking shots taken at a ridiculously low level behind the first few rows of seats. You could barely see the performers on stage.

Does anyone have an explanation for why the stage had to be that high? Was it purely to visually relate it to the overhead unit? Either way, it didn't work. Performers always looked like they were about to fall over the edge, while its high design failed to integrate in a satisfactory way with the wider venue. It was just too upright and isolated. I liked the off-shoot stage and pathway, from a conceptual perspective as well as its sculptural aesthetic in wide shots, but it was barely used.

Above all though, it was the thoroughly dull set, or rather the complete lack thereof, that made it such a disappointing show to watch. A vast LED screen a set most categorically does not make. In essence, there just wasn't anything for the director to work with by way of foreground or midground camera interaction, never mind sweeping jib shots. The complete absence of set elements to add depth and interest gave the entire night a flat and repetitive feel, as did the lack of interaction with and 'dressing' of the wider venue. In honesty, the stagng was Tallin 2002 ranked up a gear.

Saying all that, the lighting was stupendously good, the graphics great, and Graham added much amusement as ever. He strikes the perfect balance between being interested and thoroughly bemused by the event. His observation regardng one of the highly 'done' voting presenters being located under a bridge of a Saturday night stole the event Still miss the broadcaster logos though The lack of engagement of the host presenter with the voters was a little dull, but certainly made for an efficient sequence.

Still not 100 per cent sure about the new shuffling of the voting. Yes it makes matters less predictable, but equally you get a slightly poorer sense of what songs are generally the most popular across all countries. I suppose we're just used to the consistency of old - generally I think it's a positive development.

Beyond a joke. Really is, mods.