Latest Site News

[uhsting]

Totally agree that the song is not bad at all. I think it is radio-friendly and only through listening this song is better than a few songs in the grand final. It has a good instrumental hook. From the music itself this definitely does not deserve 0 points, and clearly a lot better than almost all the songs sent by the UK in the 2010s.

I think the big problem is the staging and the package. The song wasn't hyped or sold at all. Other countries were literally promoting their Eurovision entries like crazy and put a lot of thoughts to how they present the song on the stage. If the UK were to send the song that Sweden sent, I could imagine them butchering it completely and have the same fate as Embers. I really like the singer and the voice, and he is a great songwriter, but he is not selling it on stage. I believe the staging and costume team would have improved the presentation of James and the song massively. Good staging and idea helps elevate a song to another level, like what we saw with Portugal and Ukraine this year. This department needs the biggest overhaul out of all factors.

And then we have the uniqueness of the song. It is great to take risks and frankly speaking being in the grand final every time, it is always a good opportunity to showcase different unique styles of the country. This is how Italy and France stood out this year. Embers is a decent pop song but it falls flat because this is what we hear every day on radio. Like what a lot of people said before, an entry of rock, hip-hop, queer pop, metal, dance, ethnic pop would not hurt at all and UK is not just about UK pop. If we do something very different, even if the televoters hate us still, I'm sure we'll pick some points from the jury, which is what happened to Lucie Jones in 2017 though that song is still pretty common.

This post has been edited by uhsting: May 25 2021, 05:23 PM