PDA

View Full Version : What was worse: Eurovision 2003 or World Idol?


croat123
Dec 28th, 2003, 02:05 AM
:o

selesfan1
Dec 28th, 2003, 02:09 AM
World Idol with out a doubt although Eurovision wasn't hot either.

~ The Leopard ~
Dec 28th, 2003, 02:14 AM
I can't be bothered with this Idol stuff. The 2003 Eurovision had some good performances (incl. Tatu for Russia, though they seemed slightly off; and the Turkish gal who won) and some pathetic ones (esp. from the UK reps).

mboyle
Dec 28th, 2003, 02:40 AM
did Kelly will World Idol?

¤CharlDa¤
Dec 28th, 2003, 03:20 AM
The results will be in on New Years' Day!

2ace2
Dec 28th, 2003, 09:57 AM
Well, in the Eurovision contest, you have at least the impression that it's about the music. In world idol it was mostly about the judges. So I'd choose Eurovision anyday. The show is also waaaaay more professional than World Idol. It was a disgrace that a worldwide show could be so amateuristic

matthias
Dec 28th, 2003, 11:28 AM
World Idol was a big joke

all the judges did praise her own candidate

this show was a big joke, specially this arrogant suckbag from England/USA.

NaturalBlues
Dec 28th, 2003, 11:37 AM
They are both horrible :o

Joana
Dec 28th, 2003, 11:41 AM
I didn't watch World Idol, and Eurovision didn't impress me much either - I had the impression that something was going on with TATU and voting, especially of UK. Seems weird they got 0 points from them.

Experimentee
Dec 28th, 2003, 12:02 PM
I didnt watch Eurovision this year but although World Idol sucked it was still better than the other times I've seen Eurovision. The voting on Eurovision is such a joke, they all just vote for their neighbouring countries or the most powerful countries, no matter how good the performances were.

Monica_Rules
Dec 28th, 2003, 03:29 PM
Eurovision was by far worse.

TATU were the secon worse performers behind the uk.They were also out of tune and screaming but still came second LMAO!

Thats why the UK didn't give them any points they were shite!

There is no point in this competition any more the better songs never win.Its always the nordic contries joining forces,The baltic region join forces and Greece and Cyprus giving each other 12 points.

EVen if the UK sent our biggest star all over europe with th best song they wouldn't win due to tactical voting.

Dava
Dec 28th, 2003, 03:40 PM
Eurovision Rules!

Fat Frog
Dec 28th, 2003, 06:54 PM
I actually really like the Eurovision..Irelands programme for finding the entrants is also gud.
World Idol was more about a lot of arrogant fcukers (aka the judges)

Sam L
Dec 29th, 2003, 12:33 AM
World Idol not because the performances are bad, but the idea is just tacky and so over-commercial. I mean, the purpose of having individual idols is so they can get record contracts and beging their careers. And now they're competing again? please, it's just for the $$$ and TV ratings.

Benny
Dec 29th, 2003, 07:28 AM
World Idol sucked, Eurovision was much better and I like how they reveal who won then and there on the night:D

jrm
Dec 29th, 2003, 10:44 AM
people expect too much ...

Elleke
Dec 29th, 2003, 11:09 AM
Eurovision was by far worse.

TATU were the secon worse performers behind the uk.They were also out of tune and screaming but still came second LMAO!

Thats why the UK didn't give them any points they were shite!

There is no point in this competition any more the better songs never win.Its always the nordic contries joining forces,The baltic region join forces and Greece and Cyprus giving each other 12 points.

EVen if the UK sent our biggest star all over europe with th best song they wouldn't win due to tactical voting.
They ended third, Belgium was second ;).

Nicoleke
Dec 29th, 2003, 01:20 PM
I really like both, but I still prefer the Eurovision song contest :) :D :) :D ;) !!!!!