Jump to content

nowuniverse

Members
  • Content Count

    19
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by nowuniverse

  1. 14 hours ago, anthonyliberatori said:

    Which is why I hope the IOC keeps them on a leash. If Beijing turns out to be another Sochi, the Winter Olympics could very well be in danger if Calgary or Sion aren't elected for 2026 and another North American/European city elected 2030. Large, flashy, expensive, and single use venues are what we need to get away from, not encourage. Remember, Sochi did make a profit on their Games. Hosting 2014 did wonders on giving the already popular tourist area a new airport, new hotels, better infrastructure/transportation, and a ski resort so the area could be popular yearround. As a host, Sochi had a mostly positive legacy. But for the Olympic movement as a whole, it was completely detrimental. China using this opportunity to grow Winter Sports in its country and show those in countries with rising economies in Southeast Asia that China is the place to go for a winter vacation is great, but if they end up becoming another Sochi, the Games could be in trouble. I'm really hoping the IOC does all in their power to make sure Beijing keeps a close budget, as there is no real need to pass Pyeongchang and God forbid Sochi in spending. Most venues already exist. Plus, they already proved themselves to the world with an Olympics in 2008. 

    When the facilities for winter sports are not available, they need to build it new. There's no other way to do it. Yet, several facilities from the summer games are also planned to be re-purposed for winter games so I don't think they throw money to build everything new just for the sake of it. However, as the second economy of the world with over 1.3 billion people, it's such a hard task to go under budget or being modest to address concern of some people. That's not how China wants to be perceived and people have no power to question or affect them on how much they would spend. If China really worries about budget, they wouldn't consider hosting another Olympics. If IOC really cares about legacy and such things, China shouldn't be on their list. The thing is they don't care. They just want to pick a country that can host the games well. Hosting a game is the desire, right, and the responsibility of that particular country alone. It has little to do with previous or future hosts. Future hosts are under no pressure of going over budget just because of China. They need to figure out the solution that works for them if they want to host it there. It's not China's responsibility to take care of them. I only have problem with China if they keep bidding for every single game now and then leaving no chance for other countries to host but that's the problem here. I know they proved to the world in 2008. But that's Summer Olympics. This is Winter Olympics. It's a different thing for them. They wouldn't just host a second Olympics that's the same in nature. They wanted to show they can do the best with a Summer Games. And they want to do the same with a Winter Games as well. That's the reason. If it was another Summer Games, they wouldn't host it again, at least not anytime soon.

  2. 2 hours ago, zigzag said:

    It's not like PRC or IOC will care about it.. PRC has always known as the "Miracle Worker" for the IOC from what I've seen from 2008, YOG 2014 and now 2022. It felts like a less risky choice compared to Almaty due to how cooperative the IOC and PRC for all these years.. I know that for most of us IOC did it wrong at KL2015 but for these reasons, I knew from the get-go that Beijing will win 2022 easily..

    I know. China & other Asian countries have created the reputation of hosting the Olympics well. And China is certainly the best candidate when it comes to investing on infrastructures and venues. That's what an organization really loves when passing the hosting right to a country. Even without Olympics, they will keep spawning all sort of constructions here and there for all sort of purposes whether it seems reasonable or wasteful to many and they won't stop. One should remember hosting Olympics these days is not just about sports anymore. It's also about promoting host's image to the world and China always wants to be the best of the best in that case. That's why I don't think they would stop with just $4B. That doesn't mean every games has to be that expensive. It still depends on the country and its ability to invest. No one said the host country needs a lot of billions of dollars to be qualified. In fact, London, Rio, or South Korea had relatively lower budget than what Beijing had and they still hosted it well. The idea here is if the country is willing and can afford to spend as much to fulfill their Olympics vision and promote their country so then let them. It's not our money to judge. I can't tell them to spend less just because other counties would be embarrassed and pressurized to do the same. The future hosts don't have to spend that much to beat China. They just need to spend whatever amount they need to host a successful games. Simple as that....

  3. 3 hours ago, anthonyliberatori said:

    No, I do understand this, I have spent a lot of time in China. But for the future of sustaining WOG bids, it is crucial that China remains on a budget and doesn't try to top the $30B USD 2008 Games, because if they do, no Western city will want to host the Winter Games. China originally proposed under $4B USD. If they are successful with staying around there, they will cut Pyeongchang's price in half, and start to erase Sochi's terrible economic legacy, which will be crucial in determining the future of the Winter Olympics. So, yes, China getting futuristic and expensive is rather concerning. Although the fate of 2026 will already be sealed in 2022, we must remember Demver 1976 and the countless bids pulled by referendum. If Beijing goes crazy with 2022, I wouldn't put it past a Calgary or Sion 2026 bid to pull themselves out through referendum, even after being awarded the Games next year.

    I'm not saying they should overspend. I just stated to you the fact that they tend to overspend and have no problem overspending whether it has something to do with Olympics or something else. It's not like they're going to care who will host the next Winter Games after them based on how much they would spend.  

  4. They need to realize that their objective is no longer about a traditional China but a modern one. How they want people to perceive a modern China.... What's authentic and unique about their version of modernity that doesn't mix with modern Japan or Korea. What's the difference? How is it related or contributing to the world that people can relate to? We saw style and K-Pop in Korea. In Japan, probably a lot of anime and high tech stuff. But China, what does a modern China look like and why it matters or seems cool to people???

    Zhang Yimou is all about doing things with precision, number, and scale. He doesn't have that cool or a touch from the future in him. He may be great in delivering a show full of history and traditions but not when it comes to modernity. This handover feels just like the modern segment from 2008 OC: the use of music, color, lighting, people dancing and forming things....very predicable and even somewhat cheesy.  It feels like it's already 60% there in the future but stuck 40% somewhere from the past.  

    My mom said she could tell the difference between Korean and Chinese performances in the ceremony by the use of music, colors, and performances. With Korean performance, it feels fresh, stylish, cool, loosen up, and modern. China just tried too hard to be modern. That killed the fun at the same time felt cheesy/stuck in the past not as modern as Korea or Japan. 

     

     

  5. On 2/25/2018 at 11:11 AM, anthonyliberatori said:

    https://youtu.be/K5RJBInCI1M

     

    Beijing 2022 published this two days ago, obviously preparing for the large influx of online searches they were likely to get once the Closing Ceremony of Pyeongchang happened and the focus turned to Beijing. Many of the venues in the video look much more futuristic (and expensive) than the initial bid proposal videos and photos, which is somewhat concerning. I hope these modern designs aren't breaking the budget. 

    One thing you should know about China is that they don't care about how expensive. They're not under any obligation to save budget like Europe or other countries. If you spend too much in those countries, people will protest, and law, and regulations, all sort of things will happen to prevent overspending. In China, the government has ultimate power and they can spend however they want and many of their people are okay with that because they want to be proud about their country. The bottom line is they would spend any amount just to make sure the games is at its best. They built Terminal 3 of their international airport around 2008. Now they're building another one which is way bigger. So issues may arise but money is certainly not the problem.

  6. 40 minutes ago, JMarkSnow2012 said:

    Yes, I think China has a heck of a challenge for 2022 (particularly if Tokyo does something mega-impressive with technology, yet still incorporates cultural touchstones like Hokusai). China's isolationism means it doesn't really have "world icons" much more recent than the Great Wall- unlike even Sochi which made brilliant use of Russia's music, art and literature.

    They will need to create a different voice for themselves that will emotionally engage the audience not just create catchy visuals to wow people anymore. We have seen a lot of spectacular things since 2008 and all other ceremonies. People dancing synchronously & forming something, light props, floor projection, all sort of fireworks, and even drones. Those things are so predicable already. How can a modern China be cool and unique when there's already a modern Korea and technologically advanced Japan. What will set them apart. This will be a much harder task than 2008. I hope that they will have old and new producers working together to offer different takes and fresh air not just using the old producer. I know Yimou loves doing things with big number and grand scale but he's not modernly cool to me. Although what he'd do in the future could still be beautiful and big but it might feel typical and cheesy.

    So in 2022, I need something uniquely spectacular and authentically cool that will set the bar higher not just the modernity with light show, synchronous performances/drones, and lot of people with cheesy use of music or colors. 

  7. The ceremony was great as expected.

    The handover is a bit disappointing though. The only thing I like is Chinese performers are better in term of precision and synchronization & that made their performance neat while Koreans are a bit loosen up. It feels like China tried too much to beat Japan or something but fell short because it has no pace or climax. During the performance, I was expecting some sort of unseen technology emerging that could wow the audience but nothing happened...lol Additionally, it doesn't have something that people around the world can easily associate with like Mario, Doraemon. With Tokyo, you see the anthem being played in a very simple yet dramatic way that already set it apart from other hosts, followed by a creative greeting video with a lot of familiar characters and then the prime minister which is a cool surprise and the last part was very simple, modern, and futuristic. Tokyo's handover just feels unique, unexpected, cool, and authentic while China didn't quite nail it this time.

     

     

  8. 7 minutes ago, SkiFreak said:

    Lots of empty seats at the women's gold hockey game last night. Couldn't believe it. Thought it would be more full than that. There's even a hashtag #EmptySeats going on Twitter.

    Back in Vancouver, VANOC was giving out free tickets for preliminaries to fill the stands at the beginning of the first week. In the second week when I went down for 4 days, my dad and I scored free tickets from a blue coat volunteer for a medal ceremony at BC Place. As a bonus, we ran into Jaromir Jagr outside of the Saskatchewan pavilion after the ceremony. How come the PyeongChang organizing committee didn't at least give out some tickets like VANOC did?

    Those sports are not popular there which is why we don't see much enthusiasm regardless free tickets or not. But I don't think we have the same problem with Beijing 2022 because people would attend at any costs lol

  9. 48 minutes ago, Tulsa said:

    I have some doubts about your word "inspiring". Korean destroyed a millennial forest to build a track that will only be used once... Where is the inspiration ? 

    Even some young generation are inspired the problem is also geographical, the places where you can practice winter sports in Korea are very limited and they have a dry weather in winter it's the reason why they used only fake snow, it's a problem, in fact they don't have the potentiel to develop these sports there... And you can't inspire European or North america winter sport culture with 15 days of winter sports events... Moreover how would like inspire something if public don't care, it's a no-sense.

    It will be quite similar in China, they have dry weather in winter around Bijing, it's a desert area without natural snow or water. 

    I think some asian countries need to show they can do like occidental countries they want to have the same kind of leisure to say : "We are like you, we can do the same" it's like an inferiority complexe. Even you spend billions you can't buy culture or tradition and WoG can't spread this. You will never have winter sports culture in Korea or China even in 50 years or 100 years. 

     

    I don't really know if you can read the words correctly but when did I tell you that the whole population of these Asian countries would definitely go for Winter Sports just because of one event itself? I said "hopefully". I just explained that it was the intention of IOC to bring more different kinds of sports to new regions whenever possible. Inspiration comes from the action of bringing sports to the region but if you're cherry picking about pointing all the negative aspects of the game then feel free to do it. You don't inspire sports in the place where it's already popular but a place where it seems like something new and distant. We're not here to discuss about should they host it now because the decision is already made in stone but to see why thing happens that way. I never said Asian countries need to be as good in term of Winter Sports and they probably won't be due to different locations. It wasn't their intention to achieve that though. Hosting a game is not only to promote sports but also many other aspects of their country. Hosting winter games there for a few occasions doesn't kill anyone or destroy anything. It doesn't ruin the spirit and the love for winter sports in NA or Europe. The only thing it does is to give different region a chance to get exposed to new things. This is where a lot of close-mined people have problem. To keep something exclusively to certain regions instead of allowing it to spread more to the world sounds too much like an arrogant and selfish point of view. I never said that they should host more Winter Olympics in Asia. I just said it's okay for only a few occasions so people there can know more or associate those sports with themselves more. The spirit of sports and IOC is not to keep sports exclusively in certain places but bringing it to more places whenever possible and as I said above it's more of a philosophical than practical aspect. BTW, I didn't say Asian countries are throwing out the money to buy sports culture here or to be the same with anyone else.  You're the one who think that way. I just said they have good money to host a game well. I never said they throw money out to be great in Winter Sports. In the end, you have your point. IOC has their point and I'm with them. 

  10. 4 minutes ago, anthonyliberatori said:

    I hope you didn't take me to be a supporter of exclusively North American/European bids, as that is not the case whatsoever. I fully supported Pyeongchang on its road to the Games, and I'm very excited for Beijing's 2022 Games as well. I think many of us, though, who enjoy the long lasting legacy of the movement, are leaning more towards a North American or European bid. It's justified because 2026 will mark the end of either a 16 year break from the Rockies or a 20 year break from the Alps, so it's understandable why people are more supportive of Calgary and Sion than they are of Sapporo. However, after many Olympics in repeat areas, the mood of the IOC and on this website will shift to bringing to Games to new areas. After the US and Australia, the Games were brought to Greece and China. After England, the Games were brought to Brazil.

     

    However since the turn of the century, It has actually been a balance of typical hosting areas vs new hosting areas for the Winter Games. 2002, 2006 and 2010 were all in the Rockies/Alps, but 2014, 2018, and 2022 were all given to new hosting area. That is solely based on a mathematical approach, we haven't even factored in personal reasoning, the country's existing presence of Winter Sports, or the bid's longevity plan. I do agree that the Olympics need to see new places and new horizons, but for 2026, I would be almost contradicting myself as a supporter of the movement to not get behind a North American or Alps bid, it is just too risky at this point in time. Luckily, every area that is bidding has hosted as some point in time, with the only real bad choice being Stockholm. 2026 is looking optimistic. Hopefully, a successful 2026 and 2030 in the traditional areas can bring back another winter olympics to Japan in 2034.

    None of my words go against you. I understand your reasoning. I just want to elaborate a bit more about it. I'm not talking anything about 2026 onward. I just explained the purpose and the reason of bringing it to PC and Bejiing. So I only discussed about 2018 and 2022 games. It has nothing to do with 2026 or future games to be honest.

  11. 2 hours ago, Tulsa said:

    It's a good argue but it doesn't work in Korea or China to promote and develop winter sports there. WoG are cultural more than SoG. And it isn't in the Asian culture except Japan to practice or to appreciate Alpin, Nordic etc. sports.  After WoG what's happen in Korea ? Nothing, many venues will become white elephant and they won't develop winter tourism in their country because isn't a good place for. Since the beginning of WoG there are a lot of criticism in newspaper or at the TV about the lack of popular fervor, fake snow. The facts are Korean is a really a bad place to practice the main part of Winter sports because they don't have high quality ski resort or even real mountains like in Europe, Japan or North American. In Asia the place to be it's Japan for this sport, weather and snow condition are better and tourists go there.

    Pyeongchang is artificial place for winter tourism, it will remain after WoG. And IOC should stop with this kind of WoG, artificial with public who doesn't care. Stay in Europe or North America, sometimes in Japan, and it's enough. 

    WoG should be :

    Europe, North America, Europe, North America, Japan, Repeat. Sorry for the other but they don't care, it's the reality about WoG.  

    Isn't it the reason why those Sports are not popular there in the first place? The weather and the geography don't support it. That's why people don't play or care about it much. The idea here is not to make those countries immediately fall in love with Winter Sports or become Winter Sports powers like NA or Europe. The idea is to spread it to more country where it hasn't been practiced and well known before (regardless the reason) so that people there could be inspired by it especially younger generations so the goal is to introduce the Winter Sports and hopefully spark the interest about those sports there. Legacy of the venues has always been the problem not only with Winter Olympics or South Korea. One can't validate the success of bringing Winter Sports there by simply looking at the seats. The seats only indicate the people who are already interested in it. Inspiring a generation will take longer than just an Olympics to see its effect. That's why they bring it there now so from that point onward more people would know and be inspired about it. It's there for a more philosophical reason than a practical reason. And even so, I don't think it's a big problem because only a few north Asian countries can host it and after Beijing, it would probably go back to NA or Europe.... We probably won't see it being host in a country like Singapore, Thailand, because it's obviously not possible there. In the end, I'm more about well if they want to bring Winter Sports there for a few occasions, cool, let them do it and support them fully and see how it goes rather than why bringing it there or it's not supposed to be there... It may not be a perfect place for Winter Olympics, but still possible and it's good to try something new sometimes. I mean they're rich, they can host it well, they want to bring it there for the first time so let them... They're not going to host it forever but some people start to have problem with it like life and death issue. 

  12. Yeah. I'm more into the openness. That's why I see thing a bit differently. Asian countries are not known for good athleticism or proactive lifestyle. Often time, that's really a western thing regardless winter or summer sports. Bringing more sports will promote healthier and more active lifestyle in the region which can help a lot for their people. Therefore, whenever I hear people wishing to keep something exclusively to themselves, it almost sounds like hey only westerners are cool and VIP, so only them should host cool and VIP sports where the rest of the world is not enough so they're not supposed to promote or have access to it. It just sounds somewhat selfish and arrogant IMO. If they want people to have genuine love about something, they should bring and promote those things more in place where they're not dominant not take away a chance for people to experience or be inspired by it. I don't know how many people will actually be inspired by having Winter sports being brought to their area but if they go watch, it shows that sports have touched them somehow or at least they have interest in watching and even if that's not the intention hopefully from that they or their kids will be inspired and do something about it so we're not in any position to be doubtful about the power or bringing the sporting event there even if national pride is what brings them to it in the first place. 

  13. In this new age, it's very good and necessary to spread the love of sports (especially new kind of sports) to many new regions. Winter sports have been so restrictive in its nature but that doesn't mean people in certain areas shouldn't be hosting or promoting it. It's not going to take just one Olympics event to spark the interest with this kind of sports but it's a very good start to change such culture. I don't like the idea of keeping the games in certain regions all the times because they're more popular there than elsewhere and in the end the rest of the world will continue to perceive Winter Sports as something impossible and distant that only Europeans and North Americans can master. They have been hosting Winter Games there for a long time. It's very rare to have Asian countries to host Winter Olympics and after Beijing 2022 I don't think there will be more anytime soon so it's a good thing to promote this kind of games here in this continent. 

    • Like 3
  14. They have control on their technology and I believe if they had to go that way then it should be that way. That doesn't mean if they go live for it, it would fail 100% but the drone lighting technology is still in the early stage where tough and unpredictable weather could pose a risk and the Koreans would not take that risk as many things went wrong from past ceremonies.

    So we might see it live at Tokyo, Beijing, Paris, or LA when the tech is improved but still those cities don't exhibit the harsh weather like in Pyeong Chang so there won't be any excuse for them to not show it live in the future ceremonies. We'll see.

    As for me, I'm waiting for closing ceremony to see what Beijing has in store for us:)

     

  15. For the accusation of empty seats:

    From Time's magazine : No, the Olympic Stadium Was Not Empty During the Opening Ceremony in PyeongChang

    For the lighting:

    If you rewatch the whole ceremony, you would see that the whole seats were illuminated mostly by the LED installation on each seat. There's no overhead lighting for the audience (because of no-roof) to create the lighting like the vibrant purple hue at London when they lighted their cauldron. If there's roof at Pyeong Chang, I believe the seats would be much better lit like in London but that's not the fault of producers but the limitation of the stadium itself. 

    olympic-stadium-in-london-after-opening-

     

    usatsi_10596642.jpg?w=640&h=0&crop=1

    About AR and Drone:

    The technology right now is still prohibiting to have that happen live. With such dancing and wiring from the top, the star dome scene can't be created using real drones flying up like that and there's no alternative for such effect. And for the Olympics Ring, it's the strong wind, cold weather, and limited time for on-site rehearsal due to the secret nature of the ceremony. You see Sochi had their rings not fully opened and Vancouver had the cauldron malfunctioning. We need to be understanding that everyone wants the real stuff and yet the producer will do it whenever they can but they can't risk to have another malfunction case which will be an embarrassment to the country.  There will certainly be some cool tech and improvements in the future (probably in Japan) but what we see now is the promising foundation of what to come so I would rather be excited than disappointed.

     

    I quite enjoyed the ceremony. They way I enjoyed it is pretty much like London vs Beijing scenario. Sochi is the best Winter OC just like Beijing being the best of Summer OC but Pyeong Chang has their simplicity similar to London. At least, what I like about this better than Rio is that there's sense of preparedness. It's not like our vision was big but then the government cut off the budget so we had to go for environment, samba dance, and had the model walking across the stadium and called it a segment.

    What I see from South Korea's ceremony is that they represented the country well: modesty, simplicity, harmony,  future, and peace. And they delivered it in a very careful, considerate but still cool way. 

  16. For what I know, Korean people are usually very energetic with this kind of event so it surprised me a little when the crowd was somewhat quiet. However, looking deeply into the situation, I can understand why.

    This is the open-air stadium with only 35,000 seats and they have to suffer the biting cold which is the coldest ever so it's really hard for them to be all cheery and energetic. I think it's the stadium and the weather playing the main part of this issue.

    When you look at Summer Games: Most of them have seats: from 60,000-80,000 so the crowd would be much louder plus it's Summer Olympics, it's not cold so people can have more energy.

    For Winter Olympics, Sochi and Vancouver both have roof and central heating system for their stadium and they both have seats over 50,000.

    Do you see the differences?

     

  17. The Olympics Channel usually uploads the full ceremony on YouTube a few months after it ends due to the broadcast rights and restrictions from different places in the world.

    NBC has non-commentary version online now. However, it's only available in the US plus you need to have opened the online account from a cable TV provider with the package that has NBC Sports in order to login, verify and watch it... otherwise you will not be able to watch it or they will allow you to watch for 30 mins only.

    NBC version (Natural sound only/ No commentary/Full length/Uncut):

    http://stream.nbcolympics.com/pyeongchang-opening-ceremony

    I do have the BBC version now. They do have some commentary but you know the British people, it's comfortable not loud and annoying like the NBC. The most important thing is they keep the ceremony full length. So you can watch it from start to the end with no interruption. I think this is the best version because you do need to hear a little detail about each segment without being annoyed too much by the commentators and this is the good choice.

    I found them here. 

    https://rarbg.to/torrent/sxyivdr

     

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...