Talk:Molitva

Language of the song

I think the fact that the song is the first song not sung in English that won since 1998 is wrong. The last time a non-English song won was 1995 when Norway competed with Nocturne. The winner of 1998 Diva is considered to be in English, though the lyrics is not that clear. At that time it was compulsory to sing in an official language of the country. The rules changed in 1998 and any language (expect faul) was allowed in the performances. If 1998 refers to this fact, I think it should be clarified. A victory of a performance in another language is indeed remarkable and should be pointed out. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.142.215.130 (talk)

Song quality

I think we should leave the, "It is truly, truly awful" statement in the article. Perhaps it is a bit editorial, but it is certainly factual. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Unexpect (talk • contribs).

Maybe it should be added that the performer is no beauty ... not that that is imperative, but she looks more like a boy then a girl and stil she won —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.11.219.244 (talk)

I think she looks fine, and sings quite well, but the song is terribly bad. From what little I know about Eurovision I guess that this is typical. Unexpect 22:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

It would be inappropriate to leave in editors' comments that the song is "truly, truly awful." This would be a definite violation of Wikipedia's policy on neutral point of view as well as reliable sources and so forth. With that said, if it's as awful as you say, there will be plenty of reliable sources that can be quoted as to their descriptions of the song. For example, even before the winners were announced, National Public Radio here in the U.S. was discussing the contest on "All Things Considered" and said something about the public perception that the winners often are fluff and/or not that good. (Certainly their 2004 story said that in the blurb.)Lawikitejana 23:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Let's consider as an example the song which was ubiquitous some months ago on American radio and television. A leathery prostitute wiggles around and sings about her "lumpy lumpy humps"; this was wildly sucessful despite the undeniable fact that it was worthless trash(along with the lion's share of all popular music). Now, I know it to be true that this band should be dragged into the alley by the scruffs of their neck and shot, but it is NOT APPROPRIATE FOR AN ENCYCLOPEDIA, as it is merely an opinion. A correct one, by all accounts, but still. So let's stick to the facts with this poor Serb. I haven't heard this song because I expect pop music to be godawful, but it is a value judgement (thus POV) to excuse her of being mannish and unattractive, and it is certainly an aesthetic judgements (the POV of all POVs) that the song is godawful. Most popular culture, frankly, is trash. Let's stick to the facts and let Serbia have their fun.--JovanPanić 06:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

People who are unhappy, could you *please* spare readers of wiki your silly remarks. This was surely one of the best songs and performances of the contest. People from many countries voted for it, including Austria (12), Belgium (7), Denmark (6), Finland (12), France (8), Germany (8), and so on. Check it out here: http://www.eurovision.tv/addons/scoreboards/2007/final.html There is no way you can call it a "block vote" or something. If you can't see how this song is good, the problem is evidently not with the song itself, but with your own taste or your bias. Ri hwa won 15:18, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Article name

There is too Russian version of this song called Малитва/Malitva. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.237.7.40 (talk)

In Russian this word is spelled the same way as in Serbian - Молитва/Molitva Ri hwa won 11:00, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

You should find better name for this entry. "Molitva" in many languages mean "To pray to Lord" - it is religious concern. Please, rename this entry. As you could see on http://www.diggiloo.net/?2007rs11 - English name of this song is "Destiny" - here we have english wiki, we need accurate and english info. --78.0.182.9 12:39, 13 May 2007 (UTC) Also, it is not only song with same title. look this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqMX55pI6eg - another song with same name (from 2003) by Parni Valjak et Dado Topić --78.0.182.9 12:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe the article should be renamed to Molitva (song)? Pretty much all Slavic nations know that this means prayer so it could be confusing. Also, if someone ever makes an article about Dado Topic song, then it could be a disambiguation page, or this song should be the primary article because, after all, it is a Eurovision winner.--Velimir85 13:32, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

If it is done, then Voda should also be renamed on similar principles. However, I disagree on the proposition. This is the English Wikipedia, and an article about prayer would be called Prayer, not Molitva. There is no confusion. ―Bisqwit 00:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

IMHO, article should be renamed into: Destiny(Molitva) --Moravek 09:21, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

So Tornerò should be renamed to "I will return", Loca should be renamed to "Crazy (song)", Hasheket Shenish'ar should be renamed to "The Silence that Remains", etc.? I think the original song name should be prioritized, not its English translation. But, a "(song)" could be added to the name, with a redirection from Molitva. --Bisqwit 10:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Rip Off

This song is a rip-off. Just look for the videos on Youtube for proof of that... Gumdropster 17:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh really, its that Albanian propaganda again every time Serbia wins something. This is Albanian nonsense and garbage. Please stop spreading your hatred for everthing Serbian, and if anything, it would be the other way around, with Albanians stealing Serbian music becuase they are know for that, and not only Serbian but also Greek, Macedonian, Bulgarian and Turkish. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.96.218.226 (talk)

Oh please, give me a brake. If there's something about it, then it needs to be published. It has absolutely nothing to do with Albanian propaganda, Serbian hatred etc. etc. etc. I've added a section about the ripoff and other controversial topics. ZLK 19:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

But you just don't know who you are messing with and i do. These people downplay everything Serbian (i am not Serbian by the way, i am Croatian), and resort to ridiculous and low measures such as comparing two songs of which the biggest similarity is the fact that they are balads. There is nothing in common between the two, and its another attempt by Albanian propagandists to taint Serbian success, no matter what it is. It is all political and has its roots in the hatred toward everything Serbian. In 2004 their yellow press tried to taint the success of Zeljko Joksimovic's 'Lane Moje' by comparing it to some Buddhist sound from Asia. That's how far they will go to discredit anything Serbian. As soon as this blatent lie and attempt at fame has passed, this section will be removed. Just as an example, the refrain from 'Molitva' sounds a lot closer to refrain from 'Ostala si uvek ista' by Miso Kovac, a Yugoslavian/Croatian artist, and this song came out some 20 years ago. There are at least 50 other songs from former Yugoslavia that have a closer sounding refrain then this Albanian track. And not only that, but Albanians are known for copying Serbian, Greek, Bulgarian and Macedonian music and calling it their own. This is just pure Albanian garbage.

Finnish name

The correct finnish title for the song, under which it has been recorded, is "rukous", not "rukoilen". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.157.122.238 (talk)

I actually quite enjoyed the song.

Indeed I did. And I had a lot of fun last night on my own watching Eurovision, as I do every year. I now own my fourth EV CD, and listening to my favourites. Considering everyone else seems to have ostracised me for my DARING to like something 'so goddamned awful', I think I'll bitch-hermit in my room for a week until something worth coming out for happens. --The only remaining Eurovision fan in the world, Lady BlahDeBlah 19:33, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I second this opinion. I enjoyed the song. Also, I support the performer's (i.e. Marija's) happiness and opinion on that two things that are Right were witnessed: that the winning song won for its music, not for stage performance (they did not really have any coreographics), and that the winning song was in the performers' native language. I too think that Eurovision should be a music contest, not a hot-or-not contest (nor an international relationships contest); and that its entries should have something particular to the culture they come from, most importantly the language. There were other entries that match these criterias, and I don't comment on whether the Serbian one was the right winner, but I do think it was not a bad winner. Molitva is very good. But, this has nothing to do with Wikipedia! ―Bisqwit 23:19, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Is this sentence really benifitial?

"The song is also notable for its stage presentation because lacked dance routines, revealing or showy costumes, pyrotechnics and other gimmicks." All the above elements in that sentence are much more commonly found in uptunes than ballads. In fact I'd go so far as to say that gimmicks would take away from the experence of a well sung ballad. Jon 13:19, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

That might be what the author of that sentence meant.--Hadžija 17:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Explanation

The Swedish newspaper, Expressen, revealed that 2 of the artists performing "Molitva", were doing racial signs live on Eurovision. These signs were commonly used by the Serbian military and paramilitary forces during the Bosnian War.

There is also a screen capture that clearly shows one of the artists doing the racial signs.

I have moved the section on "Racial signs" here, because it is complete rubbish. The controversy in some Croatian, Bosnian and Western media says more about those media outlets than anything else. To make an analogy, does wearing green on St. Patrick's Day indicate support of the IRA?--Hadžija 19:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I also moved the "Controversy" section here, as it is original research:

Several videos on YouTube, indicate that the song may just be a ripoff. It's claimed that the Albanian song, "Ndarja", performed by Soni Malaj, is almost identical to "Molitva". A striking similarity exists between "Molitva" sang by Marija Serifovic in Eurovision 2007 and an albanian song "Ndarja" performed by Soni Malaj in Top Fest 3 in 2006, Albania. It is obvious, they tried to hide their tracks, but there is no doubt Serbia's song is nothing more than a recompilation of an existing song, tunes that we're already familiar with. In other words, the essential part of the song - the refrain, is identical.

--Hadžija 19:20, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, come on, half of the songs were partly or even as a whole taken from other songs. Why should we always emphasize on the controversy. So what about the Turkish song (I know it's originally a folk song, but still...) then, the Greek? The Ukrainian? What about the vision of the Russians? The song won, it doesn't matter what the reasons were or where it comes from. Envy, envy, envy --Laveol 09:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

STEALING songs is the worst thing ever. I think disqualification is the best option. --Riste Ristevski 21:02, 15 May 2007 (GMT +1)

But half of the songs should have been disqualified --Laveol 19:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Riste, I think your fellow Macedonian pretty much explained it all.--Velimir85 10:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Accusations of politicisation

Please read the policy before you quote it to me. WP:V says:

In general, sources of questionable reliability are sources with a poor reputation for fact-checking or with no fact-checking facilities or editorial oversight.

I wonder what a Swedish tabloid's fact checking facilities are for the Serbian salute? Just because one person, or a group of people associate something with a particular person doesn't mean "it is associated" with that person. I mean, we could say that anything to do with Russia "is associated with Stalin/the Soviet Union/the KGB" with about as much validity.

The Serbian salute "is associated with" Serbia, just like St George's Cross is associated with England. Does this mean English football fans are making a reference to the Crusades at every footballing international?

Furthermore, the version I'm reverting to mentions that some view it as nationalistic, whereas your version baldly states, wrongly, that it is nationalistic, period. Opinion writers quite often make statements of opinion as fact, to help make their point, whatever it happens to be. They're still statements of opinion, despite the way in which they're expressed.

Finally, this discussion is hardly taking place on a level playing field, as I don't speak Swedish. Could you translate the article in question?--Hadžija 01:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)