Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
cormiermax

London 2012 Opening Ceremony - What did you think?

  

143 members have voted

  1. 1. What are your feelings on the Opening Ceremony?

    • It was fantastic, up there with the best if not the best!
      37
    • It was really good, maybe not one of the best but London did it's self proud!
      40
    • Was good, could have been better.
      34
    • Meh, did not like it.
      9
    • It was poor, was disappointed.
      14
    • Was really bad, one of the worst iv seen.
      9


Recommended Posts

Because everything has to have direct relevance to the Olympics?

Try it's there because it's British - so relevant for London 2012

The scene incorporates much that is great about Britain.

  • The NHS is one of the best health services in the world (See Michael Moore's film 'Sicko').
  • Mary Poppins is known around the world and features in one of the most famous films of all time.
  • The scene includes the best selling author of all time - JK Rowling (Who is British, obviously)
  • It includes monsters from fairy tales and children stories - that Britain is known around the world for.
  • And giving actual doctors and nurses (and the children) the chance to perform in an olympic opening ceremony, well that is truly unique.

As I've said before, I love the UK and I lived there for years.

I don't question the Britishness of the above elements. I question the inclusion of these elements to the exclusion of others. I question the combination of these elements. I especially question the execution of this segment which came across as a disorganized collage.

It seemed very poorly produced and I still don't see it as fitting for an Olympic Games -- even in the context of "showcasing the culture of the host."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Parts just didn't make sense or relevance. Like i understand why Jk Rowling was there but this? Lord-Voldemort-featured-at-london-2012-opening-ceremony.jpg

And i understood the whole transformation of England and the world but it would've suited 2000 more. Beginning of new millennium what happened in the past. Farmland. Industrialization then war and technology with random speech bubbles. I didn't understand why 2012. Liked the cauldron though reuniting all the countries bringing them together

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Luckily your opinion is the minority.

Eh I don't think that would hold true if properly polled internationally, not that thats possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eh I don't think that would hold true if properly polled internationally, not that thats possible.

Just about every media review dissection I've read been's overwhelmingly positive.

But to get to the debate, of course there's gonna be divergent views.

Personally, I loved it. It suited my tastes to a tee. It wasn't perfect, but my favourite since Sydney. I sat there the whole time with a smile on my face and even clapping a few times.

Other didn't, of course. Things didn't suit their taste. fair enough, it'd be boring if we all had the same thoughts and likes, and your likes are as valid as everyone else.

Thing is, we've just about certainly all here seen a ceremony or two, probably got mesmerised by our first one, or a particular one, and now have our ideas of what "makes" a ceremony. The elements we all think it should include, the tributes and nods we feel they should always make, the mix of celebration, frivolity and solemnity an tribute. It comes down to what values we all personally attribute to the games. I think London got the mix just righ to my preferences. I sure knew it wouldn't please the traditionalists as I watched it. That's life.

If it spoke to the souls of the British here, it did a large part of it job. I sure hope they're proud and patriotic over it. And if lots of young kids, six or ten-year olds or whatever, sat down and watched their first ever Olympic ceremony, and were spellbound by the theatre and entranced by the traditions like the march of nations, and now become fascinated with the game and engaged with what's ahead and maybe started to aspire to want to be part of it in the future, then it did its other most important job. I reckon come Rio, we'll have lots of new members here who got started in Olympic fandom by what they saw and got turned on by at the London OC.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just about every media review dissection I've read been's overwhelmingly positive.

I would be shocked if the major media outlets gave it a poor review no matter how bad it was. They really aren't a good way to judge over all reaction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be shocked if the major media outlets gave it a poor review no matter how bad it was. They really aren't a good way to judge over all reaction.

You can read between the lines if it's faint praise or wholehearted. Some very well-reasoned and positive critiques I've read here and from the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can read between the lines if it's faint praise or wholehearted. Some very well-reasoned and positive critiques I've read here and from the US.

I would hold more trust in public sentiment, which can be monitored over twitter and Facebook. Iv seen a lot of people say they left after a half hour because it didn't live up to Beijing which is clearly wrong but it does show a lot of people didn't see any epicness involved which is a shame.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say the reviews are mixed. Nobody WANTS to slam the Olympics.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/culture/la-et-cm-0728-opening-ceremony-review,0,3766855.story

http://m.newser.com/story/150991/opening-ceremony-reviews-weird-but-fun.html

http://www.faniq.com/blog/Olympics-Opening-Ceremony-Spoilers-and-Review-River-Dance-and-Glee-had-a-baby-that-pukes-British-celebrities-Blog-52836

I would hold more trust in public sentiment, which can be monitored over twitter and Facebook. Iv seen a lot of people say they left after a half hour because it didn't live up to Beijing which is clearly wrong but it does show a lot of people didn't see any epicness involved which is a shame.

I have quite a few friends who watched it. All like the Queen. None loved the ceremony. The reactions ranged from "horrible" to "meh. It was ok."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, human nature tends that everyone reads the reviews they want to believe, and quickly ignore those that don't agree with their taste. We can argue this backwards and forwards, there's never gonna be a right or wrong answer. The ceremony was how it touched your personally.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, human nature tends that everyone reads the reviews they want to believe, and quickly ignore those that don't agree with their taste. We can argue this backwards and forwards, there's never gonna be a right or wrong answer. The ceremony was how it touched your personally.

I agree, some liked it some didn't. Those who liked it should be very happy they did, I know I wish I did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ceremony was how it touched your personally.

How you were touched personally is your experience -- not the ceremony. There was an actual ceremony that existed outside you. Sorry to be nit-picky, but the idea that everything actually IS what it FEELS like to a given individual is problematic to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, human nature tends that everyone reads the reviews they want to believe, and quickly ignore those that don't agree with their taste. We can argue this backwards and forwards, there's never gonna be a right or wrong answer. The ceremony was how it touched your personally.

Well said Rols. It is a shame that there are some on the forums who do not appreciate or want to listen or respect the personal opinions of others regarding the ceremony.

If you loved it, liked it, in between, disliked it or hated it - we all should be able to give our thoughts and opinions without people jumping down our throats regardless of what we think.

I hate that there are people on here who will go on the defensive if you mention negatives and make you feel like you are an idiot or demand to know why you didn't like it and how it is a travesty that god forbid you should not like the ceremony or parts of it. And vice versa, there are also people who cant understand why people liked certain parts and think that they are wrong for thinking this.

Edited by Scotguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How you were touched personally is your experience -- not the ceremony. There was an actual ceremony that existed outside you. Sorry to be nit-picky, but the idea that everything actually IS what it FEELS like to a given individual is problematic to me.

What's problematic about saying this debate is about personal aesthetics? Why would I be wrong in saying I thought the OC was good, because it touched on many elements that appealed to me?

I preferred it over the more bombastic and solemn ceremonies of recent times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, human nature tends that everyone reads the reviews they want to believe

I like this :)

And although it is only headlines - I am yet to find a negative news article about the opening ceremony. That's your mission Athensfan & menegazfelipe + anyone else.

How you were touched personally is your experience -- not the ceremony.

But how you were touched personally forms your opinion of the ceremony. Just because somebody doesn't like it - doesn't mean it is a bad ceremony. In the same way it was a great ceremony for those who did like it. It will always come down to opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I wish I did.

And maybe that's the crux. As a board full of OLympic fans, all with our very strong personal passions about different aspects, we all bring such high expectations to every such ceremony. I think we all want things to fit into what we've loved best about past editions. We probably want them to be the best ever, or at least our new favourite. For me, I'm glad the London ceremony went back to the more light-hearted, self-deprecating and less-solemn approach we haven't seen since Sydney. That all more than made up for any other minor quibbles I could pick at in its execution (I do think there was some lack of cohesion, and I wish the cauldron - which otherwise I absolutely adore - was somehow outside the stadium for all to see over the whole games). Others probably miss aspects of solemnity or tradition from past ceremonies, or it didn't hit the expectations that it would match their past favourite. That's fine - that's as valid as anyone's views.

Edited by Sir Rols

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's popular to say every opinion is equally valid, equally defensible, equally true. Philosophically I disagree with that.

I didn't hate the ceremonies, but I didn't particularly like them. If you loved it, good for you. If you hated it, fine. I don't think everyone has to agree. I'm fine with the coexistence of differing views.

I do think it is incorrect to say the ceremony IS how it affected you personally. The ceremony is the ceremony. My reaction is not the ceremony any more than anyone's reaction IS the ceremony. The ceremony is the ceremony. My reaction is my reaction. Your reaction is your reaction.

There's nothing intolerant about that in the least. If it sounds that way to you then I have not made myself clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And maybe that's the crux. As a board full of OLympic fans, all with our very strong personal passions about different aspects, we all bring such high expectations to every such ceremony. I think we all want things to fit into what we've loved best about past editions. We probably want them to be the best ever, or at least our new favourite. For me, I'm glad the London ceremony went back to the more light-hearted, self-deprecating and less-solemn approach we haven't seen since Sydney. That all more than made up for any other minor quibbles I could pick at in its execution (I do think there was some lack of cohesion, and I wish the cauldron - which otherwise I absolutely adore - was somehow outside the stadium for all to see over the whole games). Others probably miss aspects of solemnity or tradition from past ceremonies, or it didn't hit the expectations that it would match their past favourite. That's fine - that's as valid as anyone's views.

I had zero desire to see London reproduce Athens, Beijing or LA (the latter having sentimental value).

I wanted to see a ceremony with meaning, thought, attention to detail, imagination and creative unity. I was ready to embrace a totally different approach and aesthetic provided it had those qualities.

Lack of meaning, lack of thought, lack of attention to detail, lack of imagination, lack of creative unity -- those are not "alternative choices". They are deficiencies. I am not saying London was lacking in all those ways. As I've written there were some FANTASTIC moments. But in my opinion it was uneven.

In summary, I certainly am not disappointed in London solely because it was different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a large factor may have been Boyles inexperience with things outside film.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a large factor may have been Boyles inexperience with things outside film.

Amen to that. He didn't understand the medium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing intolerant about that in the least. If it sounds that way to you then I have not made myself clear.

Sigh. I honestly might be dense or tired. But I really don't get this fine distinction.

Lack of meaning, lack of thought, lack of attention to detail, lack of imagination, lack of creative unity

You see to me, I'll give lack of creative unity (or at least a clearly spelled out unity), but as for the rest, I thought it had all those elements in spades. You say tomato and i say, well, whatever I say.

Sigh, I guess any OC verdict thread on GB is never gonna be anything but a battlefield. And the London OC's merits are gonna be debated 10 years time here in "Favourite OC" threads, if there's still a GBids then.

;)

Edited by Sir Rols

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...