I must admit that Eurovision was perhaps not at its height in 1989 and most of the songs sounded very much like they were created for the ESC and wouldn't have much of a life outside the event.
Songs can still be good in spite of that but I understand that a serious music writer could get a bit stressed under these circumstances. But why so many journalists and music professionals embraced the UK entry so totally is still beyond me.
It has its moments and doesn't sound like your average ESC entry, I admit as much. It has a breezy, quality arrangement and Ray Caruana delivers a very good vocal. The lack of an obvious key change also makes it sound a bit different.
I understand all of this but still - nothing really happens throughout the entire song. It stands totally still for three minutes and yet it was frantically love bombed by critics and - so I would guess - the more "serious" music lovers in the juries.
A deserved 2nd place?
Not really. I see why it scored but I'd still say it got way more points than it deserved. If the jurors wanted songs that broke out of the typical eurovision formula, all the songs ending in the bottom three places did that too. Why didn't they leave any points for them, then?
Live Report - Why Do I Always Get It Wrong? (United Kingdom 1989)
No comments:
Post a Comment