Eurovision Season 2018: Guide to a Successful Live Performance
This year's contest is an extremely unique year in terms of being able to predict what will unfold. Whilst there is a favourite in Israel's entry, they are by no stretch of the imagination running away with the victory and there are definitely still doubts over if it can do the business in Lisbon. Aside from this, the success/failure of the Big 6 is all to play for, Semi Final 1 is possibly the most competitive semi final I have come across in all my years following Eurovision and big hitters such as Russia, Hungary & Poland could realistically not qualify this year. Fortunately or unfortunately, there is a lot to play for in Lisbon and ultimately it will come down to how the performance comes across live. With this in mind, let's take a look at specifically which factors will contribute to how the performance does on stage.
Excellent Vocals
This may sound ridiculous given that it's a song contest, but vocals are the backbone of the live performance that ultimately define how attractive the performance is to the audience. Australia 2016 is a classic example of a performance that would not have won the 2016 jury vote if the vocals weren't on point. On the other side of the spectrum, Iceland 2015 is one of my favourite Eurovision songs of all time but unfortunately Maria Olafs' vocals were pitchy on the night and the voters noticed that (leading to a 15th place finish in her semi-final). On the far side of that part of the spectrum, last year's Spanish entry was by no means a bad song, but when Manel messed up the vocals on the middle 8, his fate of coming last was sealed. In the context of this year, Israel's Netta won't win unless her vocals are flawless, the United Kingdom's SuRie will probably finish last unless her vocals are so good that they make the song stand out and in a first semi-final with four realistic qualification slots, the vocals will define the songs that come 8th from the songs that come 12th. Particularly in a year with no LEDs or screens, where the Portuguese broadcasters are eager to highlight the performances themselves, bad vocal performances in the Semis will lead to non-qualification before the phone lines even open.
(Dami Im - Australian entry at Eurovision 2016)
Fashion
Fashion at Eurovision is a funny little beast. Whilst it may not necessarily make a performance better, it can definitely sink a performance. It is no coincidence that the fan-voted Barbara Dex Award for the worst-dressed perfomer(s) have been awarded to acts that went out in the Semi Final on four of the last five years. Last year, the Czech entry was one of my favourites but she had a difficult job getting out of her Semi Final. Her job was made significantly more difficult when her outfit looked like it had been fashioned out of some kind of shock blanket. She came 13th in her Semi but I am convinced that she could have at least improved her points tally had she been wearing something that fit the song better. FYR Macedonia's entry last year is another example of a song that was very popular amongst fans, but where the outfit ended up being distracting and not contributing positively to the atmosphere that Jana Burceska was trying to create. To all smaller countries in the Semi Final - do yourself a favour and don't take a risk on the outfit of your performer(s). You can be adventurous with other parts of the staging but if the outfit is the biggest talking point of the performance, something has gone very badly and the potential of the song is wasted.
(Martina Barta - Czech entry at Eurovision 2017)
Props
In a year with no screens, there will probably end up being more props that get brought to the Lisbon stage. I will start this paragraph by saying that props can contribute very positively to the atmosphere around a performance. Sweden are the kings of good props and staging techniques at Eurovision but their most recent opportunity to host the contest was very nearly won by a Russian act who brought one of the most talked about props of all time. Sergey Lazarev's rubber wall and the way he interacted with it very nearly brought the contest back to Russia in 2016. On the other end of the spectrum, Ukraine's O. Torvald brought a massive model of a head to the Kyiv stage; a prop that added absolutely nothing to the stage performance. Be it not for a pitchy Spanish performance and a bland German song, Ukraine would have come last. In these two examples, we see where props can add and distract from a performance. A good use of a prop is a prop where interaction with it adds positively to the stage performance. In the context of this year, Netta's looping machine will be a prop that will very much add to the success of the performance as (unsurprisingly) with Benjamin Ingrosso's light box. For everybody else, they will have to think very hard about the props they bring and what it adds to the final performance.
(Sergey Lazarev - Russian entry at Eurovision 2016)
Use of the Tech
As the biggest TV show in the world, it is very well known that Eurovision Finals have a history of including a top-of-the-line set of technical equipment available to the acts. This year may not have LED screens but there is still the massive lighting wall and the two ship sides that apparently can move. Combining this collection of lighting options with camera angles that highlight the performers in the best possible way can allow a song to punch above its weight. My favourite example from last year is Bulgaria. The studio version of the song was alright but it was Kristian Kostov's live performance compared with the brilliant use of Sven (the multi-use lighting fixture from last year) that really made the performance into a Eurovision classic and very nearly brought the contest to Sofia. In contrast to my paragraph on fashion, it is very difficult to go wrong with using the tech as most of it is so fancy and exciting that impressing the audience is not difficult. However, getting the best out of the tech and making the tech use work with the song will impress audience members into picking up the vote and feeling a need to vote for the performance even if the song wasn't the strongest.
(Kristian Kostov - Bulgarian entry at Eurovision 2017)
Something Special
Every year, there's a number of Eurovision entries that look at the song that won last year and take inspiration off what caused it to win so that it can be injected into their entry. Eurovision 2016, we're looking at you! Ultimately, the song that wins is something where the staging is so unique and special that it forces it to stand out on a night of 26 performances. For Salvador, it was the simple camera angles whilst being the only performance to be staged on the island in the middle of the audience that brought the contest back to Portugal. For Jamala, it was a song that told a brutal truth combined with a beautiful, traditional lighting design with a chorus in Crimean Tatar to boot. For Mans, it was the balloon man and his interaction with the animations behind him. Melodifestivalen has the reputation it has because it has recognised that in order to do well at Eurovision, your staging has to stand out from everybody else's, leading to a plethora of songs that though not selected as the Swedish entry, would still have great success at the finals. What will it be this year? Will it be Netta and her looping machine? Will it be Elina and her projection dress? Will it be Mikolas and his camel (or whatever he brings)? Will it be another Bulgarian staging masterclass? Will Australia continue their reputation of strong staging and will it be enough to win the contest? One thing's for sure it will be the song with staging that stands out, takes risks and is fundamentally different from everybody else's that will be crowned Eurovision Song Contest winners on May 12th!
(Salvador Sobral - Portuguese entry at Eurovision 2017)
Thanks for reading guys! What are your thoughts on the staging that will stand out this year? Is there anything I have missed from my list? Let me know in the comments below.
Excellent Vocals
This may sound ridiculous given that it's a song contest, but vocals are the backbone of the live performance that ultimately define how attractive the performance is to the audience. Australia 2016 is a classic example of a performance that would not have won the 2016 jury vote if the vocals weren't on point. On the other side of the spectrum, Iceland 2015 is one of my favourite Eurovision songs of all time but unfortunately Maria Olafs' vocals were pitchy on the night and the voters noticed that (leading to a 15th place finish in her semi-final). On the far side of that part of the spectrum, last year's Spanish entry was by no means a bad song, but when Manel messed up the vocals on the middle 8, his fate of coming last was sealed. In the context of this year, Israel's Netta won't win unless her vocals are flawless, the United Kingdom's SuRie will probably finish last unless her vocals are so good that they make the song stand out and in a first semi-final with four realistic qualification slots, the vocals will define the songs that come 8th from the songs that come 12th. Particularly in a year with no LEDs or screens, where the Portuguese broadcasters are eager to highlight the performances themselves, bad vocal performances in the Semis will lead to non-qualification before the phone lines even open.
(Dami Im - Australian entry at Eurovision 2016)
Fashion
Fashion at Eurovision is a funny little beast. Whilst it may not necessarily make a performance better, it can definitely sink a performance. It is no coincidence that the fan-voted Barbara Dex Award for the worst-dressed perfomer(s) have been awarded to acts that went out in the Semi Final on four of the last five years. Last year, the Czech entry was one of my favourites but she had a difficult job getting out of her Semi Final. Her job was made significantly more difficult when her outfit looked like it had been fashioned out of some kind of shock blanket. She came 13th in her Semi but I am convinced that she could have at least improved her points tally had she been wearing something that fit the song better. FYR Macedonia's entry last year is another example of a song that was very popular amongst fans, but where the outfit ended up being distracting and not contributing positively to the atmosphere that Jana Burceska was trying to create. To all smaller countries in the Semi Final - do yourself a favour and don't take a risk on the outfit of your performer(s). You can be adventurous with other parts of the staging but if the outfit is the biggest talking point of the performance, something has gone very badly and the potential of the song is wasted.
(Martina Barta - Czech entry at Eurovision 2017)
Props
In a year with no screens, there will probably end up being more props that get brought to the Lisbon stage. I will start this paragraph by saying that props can contribute very positively to the atmosphere around a performance. Sweden are the kings of good props and staging techniques at Eurovision but their most recent opportunity to host the contest was very nearly won by a Russian act who brought one of the most talked about props of all time. Sergey Lazarev's rubber wall and the way he interacted with it very nearly brought the contest back to Russia in 2016. On the other end of the spectrum, Ukraine's O. Torvald brought a massive model of a head to the Kyiv stage; a prop that added absolutely nothing to the stage performance. Be it not for a pitchy Spanish performance and a bland German song, Ukraine would have come last. In these two examples, we see where props can add and distract from a performance. A good use of a prop is a prop where interaction with it adds positively to the stage performance. In the context of this year, Netta's looping machine will be a prop that will very much add to the success of the performance as (unsurprisingly) with Benjamin Ingrosso's light box. For everybody else, they will have to think very hard about the props they bring and what it adds to the final performance.
(Sergey Lazarev - Russian entry at Eurovision 2016)
Use of the Tech
As the biggest TV show in the world, it is very well known that Eurovision Finals have a history of including a top-of-the-line set of technical equipment available to the acts. This year may not have LED screens but there is still the massive lighting wall and the two ship sides that apparently can move. Combining this collection of lighting options with camera angles that highlight the performers in the best possible way can allow a song to punch above its weight. My favourite example from last year is Bulgaria. The studio version of the song was alright but it was Kristian Kostov's live performance compared with the brilliant use of Sven (the multi-use lighting fixture from last year) that really made the performance into a Eurovision classic and very nearly brought the contest to Sofia. In contrast to my paragraph on fashion, it is very difficult to go wrong with using the tech as most of it is so fancy and exciting that impressing the audience is not difficult. However, getting the best out of the tech and making the tech use work with the song will impress audience members into picking up the vote and feeling a need to vote for the performance even if the song wasn't the strongest.
(Kristian Kostov - Bulgarian entry at Eurovision 2017)
Something Special
Every year, there's a number of Eurovision entries that look at the song that won last year and take inspiration off what caused it to win so that it can be injected into their entry. Eurovision 2016, we're looking at you! Ultimately, the song that wins is something where the staging is so unique and special that it forces it to stand out on a night of 26 performances. For Salvador, it was the simple camera angles whilst being the only performance to be staged on the island in the middle of the audience that brought the contest back to Portugal. For Jamala, it was a song that told a brutal truth combined with a beautiful, traditional lighting design with a chorus in Crimean Tatar to boot. For Mans, it was the balloon man and his interaction with the animations behind him. Melodifestivalen has the reputation it has because it has recognised that in order to do well at Eurovision, your staging has to stand out from everybody else's, leading to a plethora of songs that though not selected as the Swedish entry, would still have great success at the finals. What will it be this year? Will it be Netta and her looping machine? Will it be Elina and her projection dress? Will it be Mikolas and his camel (or whatever he brings)? Will it be another Bulgarian staging masterclass? Will Australia continue their reputation of strong staging and will it be enough to win the contest? One thing's for sure it will be the song with staging that stands out, takes risks and is fundamentally different from everybody else's that will be crowned Eurovision Song Contest winners on May 12th!
(Salvador Sobral - Portuguese entry at Eurovision 2017)
Thanks for reading guys! What are your thoughts on the staging that will stand out this year? Is there anything I have missed from my list? Let me know in the comments below.
Comments
Post a Comment