Jump to content

Sir Rols

Moderators
  • Posts

    22,047
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    454

Everything posted by Sir Rols

  1. And I wouldn’t be too sure about that. For al that Qatar was a reviled host in so many quarters in the lead-up and during its World Cup, it ended up being the most watched ever. I really old style broadcasters like NBC know they have to pull out all stops to compete in the media landscape today. Events like the OIlympics are among the few showstoppers they can pull out to hold their own against streaming. I still say it’s the event (and tme scheduling) more than the host.
  2. I’m not sure if sending more “stars” this year is a result of the location, or more that NBC is showing more live coverage this year and having to do more to counter changing viewership patterns in this age of streaming - they have to build up the hype more when their competition is Netflix et al. Plus, they likely want to “blood” a few new faces and personalities ahead of their home town games in 2028, which will be a much bigger deal for them by orders of magnitude. interesting question whether the “quality” of the opening has much affect on viewership of the rest of the games. It certainly would affect overall perceptions here on GamsBids, but we’re not the average audience.
  3. And all that indicates is firstly we have different anticipations and enthusiasms and secondly, that we are a particular, narrow, subset of fans who care about such things (or not - there’s plenty of members who couldn’t care less about the ceremonies or the look). The majority of the world will tune in for the spectacle of an Olympic opening ceremony, and be pleasantly surprised if it goes well and Paris makes a good backdrop impression or underwhelmed if it all goes tits up (we’ll be hurriedly posting out ratings however it goes). And those that follow Olympic sports or cheer on their national team’s chances at gold will tune in whether it’s in front of the Eiffel Tower or in some sports hall in Lille.
  4. My private boycott of the 2022 ceremonies was driven solely by my personal political and moral misgivings at the anticipation of a propaganda show being staged by a regime approaching the peak of wolf warrior and anti human rights nastiness. If China had followed a more liberal path over the past decade or so, my feelings would have been totally different. And my boycott was solely on the propaganda aspects - I still devoured the following 16 days of sports avidly. It was in a peak viewing time zone for me. Paris, yes, I’m highly excited by. And I’m admittedly a Francophile. I found the handover stirring as a beautifully crafted bit of theatre. And a lot of my heightened expectations of Paris have been fed by my personal positive reactions to the teasers they have thrown our way so far - the logo, look, pictograms and plans for a new kind of ceremony and such. If I thought those were ho-hum and we’d be tuning into a Stade de France opening, my excitement wouldn’t be as heightened. Possibly more like the Baron, another admitted Francophile, who hasn’t liked them and done nothing but complain and kvetch in the lead-up. And the time zone is likely to curtail my ability to watch as much as I’d like. Anyway, we’re GamesBids Olympic fans. We’re not typical fans or viewers. That’s what we do. Rate the ceremonies and looks, and compare games, and argue the merits and rankings of cities and predict future hosts and argue the merits of our favourites. We’re a small, obsessed minority. A huge majority of the world likely have no idea the Olympics are taking place in Paris this year, and won’t until they tune in the first Saturday, much less where they’re going to be held in 4 or 8 years time. Broadcast ratings will more likely be driven by time zones, and how well your local team is performing this year, or whether Generation Y is into this whole nationalistic competitive sports thing, more than which monument is this sport being performed in front of.
  5. Exactly. What are such rankings based on. Political clout? Financial strength? Cultural influence? Liveability? Tourism attractiveness? Population size? It’s all just a melange of undefinable that are often just subjective anyway. Ditto for what makes a successful Olympic host or not.
  6. That’s great news for those who’ve been waiting. In time to get them before the fun begins. And belated congrats on the 1k @Bear!
  7. I really think you’re over-thinking this @venuedesignlover. Plenty of beta hosts have shone and dazzled, and some alpha hosts have been lacklustre, and often the difference is only in the eye of the beholder. What lifts a games higher is organisation, flair and a bit of luck - it’s like capturing lightning in a bottle. It’s not the size or importance of the host city, it’s what they make of it. I don’t think the majority of people watch an Olympics specifically for the host. They’re there for the occasion, and if the host can add some local pizzazz to proceedings, that’s a bonus.
  8. Also, as has just been discussed in the typography thread, Munich also set the design template for almost every Olympics for the rest of the 20th century. It’s hard overestimate the legacy it left on Olympic design. I agree with Aussie Kiwi - until the attacks, it was well on course to being one of the best and most influential games of all time, and even after the attacks it’s influence was still stamped on successive games for decades.
  9. But anti-sex beds make for a much better headline… and in a roundabout way end up giving them more coverage
  10. And now the Brits; ceremonial… Team GB’s Olympic Games ceremony kit including updated Union Jack and Hawaiian-style floral shirt revealed
  11. Which just goes again to illustrate our different tastes and perceptions. The attractiveness of Budapest to me is not in any technical elements. And certainly not the politics. It’s mainly the location and significance itself. I don’t see a “beta” city, I see an Eastern European cultural alpha, a beautiful jewel on the Danube. A location every bit as attractive and glamorous as, say, Barcelona would have seemed in the 1980s. It’s a little like discussions here about the 2022 host race. For many people, Almaty was “Yuck! A sh!thole in sh!thole ex-Soviet Kazakhstan. Borat-vllle”. For many others (including me) it was “why would the IIOC bypass such a beautiful, exotic, mountainside Silk Road jewel in favour of huge, dirty, grey, totalitarian non-Winter destination Beijing?” Nobody is or was right or wrong. Just different perceptions and preferences. Anyway, I don’t think there’s any dangers or fears of running out of “alpha” cities. You mention some yourself - Shanghai, Berlin, Madrid. You could add Rome, Toronto, New York, Istanbul and more. By the time all, or any at all, of them where exhausted, London, Paris, LA, Tokyo etc etc would be distant enough to look attractive, and possible again. And in the meantime, if some “B cities also fall in some hosting gaps, isn’t that a good thing? Shouldn’t we be wanting more potential hosts? And who is to say what cities will rise to become new political, economic or cultural alphas in coming decades? I mentioned Barcelona earlier. When I was young, it was more known as a punchline in Fawlty Towers rather than the glamour designation it is today. Seoul was considered as little more than a beta city in a beta country. Today it’s an east Asian alpha and Korean culture’s being more vibrantly recognised and embraced in the west. And finally, are so-called “alpha” hosts the be-all and end-all anyway? I think it’s fair to say opinions are divided on whether Rio left a positive or negative legacy for the Olympics. I’m not sure whether Beijing (either time) was ultimately positive for the Games. Tokyo, unfortunately through circumstances, didn’t really fulfil the hopes and potential many had for it.
  12. There’s a lot to unpack in that. First, I’d say what cities are considered “exciting” as hosts depends a lot on individual preferences - like when you expressed a lack of enthusiasm for Budapest, yet other expressed how they’d find that prospect very attractive and enticing. Second, the IOC can only choose from locations that are interested at any particular time. The amount, and “quality”, of those cities will always depend on how popular and attractive the Olympics seem to be in popular opinion at that point, and that depends on lots of things - costs, world viewership, social attitudes etc. The challenges the Olympics face over the coming decades from things like global warming, international relations, the effects of generational change and digital and emerging media on public entertainment tastes etc will affect how attractive a proposition hosting the games will be in the future. As long as the IOC can successfully navigate those challenges, and adapt where needed to suit the times, and people still find the games popular to watch, there will always be cities and countries wanting to host them. in short, I just believe one we shouldn’t try to over-think hosts and hosting too far into the future. As fans, we should just hope the whole concept of the Games maintains its popular appeal. As long as it does, things will always tend to work out.
  13. Good on you, I approve Actually, for all that I’m as opinionated as the next GamesBds member about the ceremonies, have my favourites, and have seen all of them (bar, deliberately, Beijing 2022) since 1976, it’s rare that I’ve actually rewatched any of them. The only one I’ve watched through more than once is Sydney (for predictable reasons). Otherwise, I’ve rewatched favourite segments from some ceremonies (the Soviet era segment of Sochi, some of the musical numbers from London’s closing) but never any other ceremonies in full. One thing I HAVE rewatched multiple times over the past three years is the Paris handover in Tokyo. I just love it, so stirring, from the anthem to the end!
  14. I didn’t even look that far. Apart from the thick blocky logo text, I can’t say I’ve seen much else yet to have an idea. I just figured we’ve still got most of the look and stuff ahead to look forward to.
  15. I attribute Munich’s look and graphics a lot with initially kindling my passion for the games. I remember having a little preview booklet (I think 10-year-old me picked it up at the dentist) with logos and maps and all the sports pictograms and such and it fascinated me. That so many of these became semi-official templates for games branding over the next quarter century or so is a tribute to the clarity and utility of the Munich branding. It’s almost a pity that’s it almost gets lost now because it was so ubiquitously used I succeeding games. That said, I’m a big fan now how graphics have become more imaginative and distinctive this century and now an integral and important part of the individual games’ identities. Strictly on its typeface, though, I’m not sure I consider it having broke any new ground. It was a standard sans serif font (univers 55, developed in the 1950s) similar to Tokyo 64’s and used either exactly, or with slight variations, by many after. It certainly suited the clean, modern Munich look, but for the purposes of this poll, I was thinking more of assessing those fonts designed specifically for their games rather than generic fonts adopted fr Olympic use.
  16. I used TheOlympicDesign.com a lot when I was doing the Look and Pictograms polls. Didn’t think to go there for the fonts (which was really just a whim that came up after @venuedesignlover was commenting on them in the Milano-Cortina thread). Looking through the typefaces there, the other miss - and I see now it was a MAJOR miss - was Mexico City 1968: My vote for Paris still stands, but the page above just made me realise yet again how ahead of its time Mexico was with its Olympic look and graphics. It really was an amazing, trend-setting games graphics-wise.
  17. Lol! Thanks for that. I knew someone would find some omission I’d made. Honestly, when I was googling all the games, the only result I got from “Vancouver 2010 font” and “Vancouver 2010 look” was the logo font, which I thought was not distinguished enough to stand out as an original typeface. Actually, interesting those examples you gave. The “With glowing hearts” example you showed, with its rounded edges, is not a match with the alphabet shown below it. It seems like Vancouver had three fonts then (counting the logotype).
  18. As to my personal thoughts and preferences: I loved Sydney’s brand font, and rather proud we sparked off the more creative use of fonts. I could see though why it wasn’t more widely used - it would probably be messy and difficult to read, London gets high marks for fully embracing a new font. Like all it’s branding, it was edgy and possibly hard to love, but by God it was effective in distinctively branding those games. Loved Rio’s. It was attractive, distinctive and came sever so close to getting my vote for favourite, but at the end, that vote went to… Paris! What’s not to love about the Paris font? It’s classy, simple, elegant, fully embraces its art deco flavour. Magnifique! As has been nearly every aspect of Paris’ branding and design.
  19. This is a poll idea that came up from a comment/suggestion by @venuedesignlover. It’s not something we’ve done before, but I thought could be interesting to discus and vote. A few comments on those presented. I’ve gone with totally original or specifically developed fonts used for particular games Those not listed or shown usually used standard Ariel, sans serif or times Roman fonts. The 1990s hosts, for example, all seemed to use Times Roman typefaces in their logos and signages. 2000 seemed to be the birth of the original created typefaces for logos and such, and while a few since then (SLC, Athens, Vancouver, PyeongChang and Tokyo*) have gone with standard sans serif types, we’ve otherwise seen some a trend to very new typefaces especially created for their Olympics. That’s not to say that those earlier fonts weren’t good or used effectively, but to me they didn’t break any new typographical or design ground. Feel free to disagree, show examples and state your case for other Olympic typefaces you think I’ve egregiously snubbed. Some of these types, especially Beijing, apparently have only been applied to the actual logos. Torino had other applications but I couldn’t find examples that worked well here. Sydney surprised me - I thought it was only used in the logo, but I found several examples of the full font type. Personally, though, I can’t recall it ever being used at the games beyond the logo. London, and then onwards, we started seeing applications of the full new typefaces across the look and in wider signage and materials. I suspect more use of online applications drove that a bit too. * The Tokyo one shown was NOT the one ultimately used. It was abandoned shortly after release following the plagiarism scandal surrounding the logo and they ultimately went with a standard sans serif font. But I was fascinated to see the disgraced logotype had already been used as the basis for a branding font for the games, and thought it as worth sharing and discussing. Personally I find it very intriguing, but very hard to read. ** The Milano-Cortina one is based on conjecture and a font they have just started using on their website. I’m surmising it is the games font (it was indeed what kicked off this thread/poll idea), but as far as I know nothing’s been said officially yet.
  20. I don’t have any great problem with it, I’ll applaud any host that moves beyond using an Arial or a Times Roman font. Dedicated Olympic host fonts are a more recent development of Olympic graphic design. To me, Milan’s is legible without going overboard, and has a bit of playfulness to it. But yours is a valid opinion on them. Maybe I should do a 2024 poll on Olympic fonts? Gives me a project to work on I still don’t think there’s such a thing as a “standard” Oly pictograms set. The Munich 72 pictograms became a template for about 20 years of games, and are probably the most recognisable, but even then there were always slight tweaks between games. The winter pictograms have been even more variable - if you look at the thread link I posted yesterday, it’s actually hard to think of any of the winter ‘grams as being “standard”. The ones on the Milan site at the moment are pretty certainly the PyeongChang pictograms. Unless they’re going to be very lazy or unimaginative, I expect these will change before too long and Milan will unveil their own set.
  21. Don’t see much indicating the “look” on there, beyond the typeface. What makes you think it’s not Olympic-friendly? It’s similar to previous faux cursives, like Sydney and Rio, As to the pictograms, those shown seem to be the same as PyeongChang’s. I don’t think there is such a thing as “standard” Olympic pictograms, everybody puts their own spin on them, no mater how slightly. I expect these are just placeholders till they really start announcing their branding over the next year or so.
  22. Watched it through now. Yeah, it’s catchy, but I still found the Tokyo handover piece more stirring. Parts of that full version sounded like a 1970s cop show theme. Nice enough, but it didn’t, to me at least, have that “cool” factor that’s impressed me with everything Paris has done so far.
  23. I don’t know how to answer that. Vancouver seemed human-grade, while PyeongChang, despite having watched it thoroughly, left no lasting impression on me at all. Sochi just seemed to carry out all that was expected of it with machine-like precision. I’m not sure what I can add - it’s just a general vibe.
  24. A lot to take in this morning… I assume this is what we’ll be hearing at the medal ceremonies and perhaps the start of sessions. I won’t say I dislike it - it’s catchy and I don’t the orchestral part before the studio band kicks in, but I much preferred the music from the handover in Tokyo. Is Celine confirmed or conjecture? Hope she makes it on stages (and gets a little beef on those bones). Imagine. Sigh… It’s better than the OIympic hymn I suppose. It’s okay, but it’s never had much replay ability. We gotta get used to it I suppose. Nice royalties for Yoko and Sean.
×
×
  • Create New...