Eurovision 2026 Reviews: Part 3

It's time for me to scrutinise some more of this year's Eurovision line-up. I've really been enjoying writing my reviews this year, so I hope you enjoy reading them. Please do share any thoughts with me either in the comments or over on Bluesky; I'd love to hear what you have to say! This time, I'm talking about Armenia, France, Greece, Poland and Portugal.

Greece: Akylas – “Ferto”

“Ferto” by Akylas is one of those Eurovision entries that arrives with a wave of online enthusiasm and immediately splits opinion. On paper, it has many of the ingredients of a contemporary Eurovision success: a hyper-stylised production, meme-ready hooks and a performance style clearly calibrated for variety. But despite its undeniable energy, I think this song also serves to illustrate the limits of its formula. The studio version of “Ferto” is slick to a fault. Musically, it sits somewhere between dance-pop, Eurodance and pop-rap, blending Mediterranean textures with a relentless, almost mechanical beat. The production is busy and maximalist, throwing in sonic ideas at a rapid pace – chant-like refrains, spoken interjections and a beat that rarely lets up. This makes it immediately catchy, but also somewhat exhausting. The hook, built around the repeated “ferto” refrain, does its job in terms of memorability, but quickly tips into monotony. It feels engineered for short-form platforms rather than sustained listening, which perhaps explains both its popularity and its ceiling. The song’s lyrics have become a focal point for interpretation, often framed as a commentary on consumerism and excess. The text certainly supports this reading: references to luxury items and the repeated demand to “bring it to me” evoke a caricature of insatiable desire. However, I think this is where the discourse diverges from reality. Not every playful or exaggerated Eurovision entry needs to carry a deeper socioeconomic meaning, and in this case the messaging feels more superficial than profound. Even if Akylas has cited themes including greed and overconsumption among his inspirations for the song, the delivery is so tongue-in-cheek that it risks being flattened into aesthetic rather than substance. The insistence from parts of the Eurovision fandom that “Ferto” is a layered critique of society feels like overcompensation for criticism it has received. At its core, the song is a high-energy novelty piece with a sentimental twist. I like it for what it is and don’t feel the need to defend it by trying to twist it into anything else.

That sentimental twist I just spoke about arrives in the bridge, when the tone briefly shifts into something more sincere. It gestures towards personal struggle and emotional grounding, which Akylas has linked to his upbringing. This section is, for me, the song’s strongest moment, offering contrast and a depth that the rest of the track largely avoids. Still, the transition is abrupt, and rather than recontextualising the song, it feels appended – almost as if shoehorned in to appeal to juries by legitimising the chaos that precedes it. The national final performance probably demonstrated both the strengths and weaknesses of the song. Charisma is not an issue here: Akylas commands the stage with confidence, and the concept leans into the song’s eccentricity. However, the staging definitely needs to be refined before it gets to Vienna – for such an up-tempo song, the performance was slightly lacking in dynamism and was also limited in terms of movement. There is a tension between the frantic energy of “Ferto” and a performance that doesn’t always match it physically, something that will need addressing on the Eurovision stage. At the same time, the stylised awkwardness may prove to be part of the appeal of this package – what some see as chaotic, others interpret as deliberately offbeat. This song’s reception has been predictably divided. Whilst younger audiences and online fans will be more likely to embrace its fun factor and viral potential, others find it derivative or overly calculated. As for its chances at Eurovision, this is clearly competitive. It has visibility, memorability and a distinct identity – three crucial assets in a field as crowded as this year’s. It has performed well in early polls and betting odds; however, its reliance on repetition and stylistic gimmickry may limit its jury appeal, and its polarising nature could cap its televote score. A solid qualification and mid-to-upper table finish in the final seems likely, but Eurovision victory requires a broader emotional response than the song is able to deliver consistently.

Ultimately, “Ferto” is effective on its own terms: loud, immediate and unapologetically fun. The problem is that it doesn’t always offer much beyond that – but perhaps it doesn’t need to. The insistence on extracting deeper meaning may say more about Eurovision discourse than the song itself.

My Score: 5

Portugal: Bandidos do Cante – “Rosa”

Portugal has found recent success at Eurovision by steadfastly refusing to conform to modern expectations. Year after year, the country sends songs that are designed to represent Portugal and Portugal alone, without caring particularly what the rest of the continent thinks – if they get on board too, that’s a bonus. This decade, Portugal has qualified for the final every year with entries that have sounded distinctly Portuguese. Last year, Napa’s “Deslocado” even proved to be the sleeper hit of the contest. The Portuguese national final Festival da Canção was made somewhat more complicated than usual this year when thirteen out of sixteen competing artists said that they would not participate in Eurovision should they win the competition due to Israel’s participation. Thankfully for broadcaster RTP, the eventual victor, five-piece group Bandidos do Cante, was not among these – which saved everybody a major headache. Their song, “Rosa”, is quietly distinctive in this year’s Eurovision line-up, and once again, is one that leans heavily on Portuguese musical heritage ahead of contemporary pop trends. Built around the polyphonic traditions of cante alentejano, the song stands out immediately for its vocal arrangement, with layered harmonies taking precedence over instrumental development, creating a soundscape that is austere but atmospheric. In the studio version, “Rosa” is understated to the point of fragility. The production is deliberately sparse, allowing the voices to carry emotional weight without distraction. This works both for and against the track: on one hand, the purity of the harmonies is striking and authentic, offering a rare sense of intimacy in a contest often dominated by maximalism; however, the song’s dynamic range is limited – it rarely builds or surprises, which doesn’t help it to leave an impact on a first-time listener. The arrangement feels more like a vignette than a fully developed narrative arc.

“Rosa” uses the metaphor of a neglected garden to explore lost love and regret, evoking a sense of saudade – another specifically Portuguese theme tied to longing and absence. Lines about failing to “water” the relationship and watching it fade are simple but effective, though potentially lacking in originality. The imagery is cohesive, but at times a little predictable, relying on well-worn symbols rather than offering a fresh lyrical perspective. Still, the restrained language complements the musical minimalism, reinforcing the song’s introspective tone. The national final performance translated this intimacy effectively, albeit conservatively. The staging was minimal, focussing on the group’s vocal unity rather than visual storytelling. Whilst this approach aligns with the song’s ethos, it risks appearing static in a televised competition. Without a strong visual hook, the performance depends almost entirely on vocal precision and emotional connection – both competently delivered, but not necessarily compelling enough to draw attention away from more dynamic entries. At the moment, I think “Rosa” occupies a slightly precarious middle ground in terms of its Eurovision prospects. Its authenticity and cultural specificity could appeal to juries, particularly those valuing vocal technique and musical identity. However, its subdued nature may struggle in the televote, with fan reactions suggesting that this is the kind of song that many appreciate but few choose as a favourite – a potentially dangerous position in a semi-final format, though we mustn’t forget Portugal’s tendency to qualify from seemingly unlikely situations.

Overall, “Rosa” is a tasteful and sincere entry that prioritises artistry over accessibility. Whilst it enriches the contest’s diversity, its chances of progressing to the final – and contending for a top result – will likely depend on whether subtlety can cut through Eurovision’s typically high-volume spectacle.

My Score: 6.5

France: Monroe – “Regarde”

France is a country that seems determined to win Eurovision sooner rather than later. Since Barbara Pravi’s second-place finish in 2021, the country’s entries have suggested a renewed commitment to chanson authenticity, which has brought success though some would also argue diminishing returns. Last year, Louane failed to convert critical praise into televote success, but still finished inside the top ten. France has managed to win Junior Eurovision four times in the last six years, but hasn’t won the main contest since 1977. Hoping to change that in Vienna is Monroe, who will perform the song “Regarde”, a carefully constructed blend of operatic technique and contemporary pop ambition – an entry that feels both impressively executed and conspicuously calculated, with many fans pointing out similarities with “The Code” and “Wasted Love”, the last two Eurovision winners. At just seventeen years of age, Monroe represents a continuation of France’s recent strategy: selecting technically exceptional vocalists with a strong artistic identity. A classically-trained soprano who rose to prominence after winning a TV competition, she channels her operatic training into broader appeal. Her background – split between France and the USA, with early exposure to choir, piano and classical repertoire – positions her as both culturally hybrid and musically disciplined. This is significant, as France seems to be increasingly favouring artists who can package ‘Frenchness’ for an international audience whilst maintaining technical polish. The studio cut of “Regarde” is undeniably striking. It opens with restrained piano and strings before expanding into a cinematic arrangement that merges pop ballad structure with operatic flourishes. The production leans heavily on dynamic escalation: quiet introspection gives way to soaring high notes, culminating in a climatic final section clearly designed for the Eurovision stage.

Yet this precision is also its weakness. Every beat feels engineered – each vocal run, orchestral swell and key change seems placed with competitive intent rather than organic expression. The result is a track that impresses more than it moves. As some fans have noted, it feels clinical and overly constructed at times, even if the vocal performance itself is difficult to fault. Lyrically, “Regarde” is a fairly standard ode to love as a universal, transformative force. The narrative – wandering through emotional isolation before being “struck” by love – leans on familiar imagery. A line such as “C’est ça l’amour / Il est partout” (That’s love, it’s everywhere) captures both its accessibility and lack of specificity. More interesting is the linguistic strategy. In recent years, France has leaned heavily into overtly recognisable markers of its language – clear diction, repeated French imperatives and classic romantic vocabulary. This appears to be a deliberate branding choice: rather than diluting French identity with English lyrics (a common Eurovision tactic), France is doubling down on linguistic distinctiveness whilst ensuring that the meaning remains broadly intelligible. However, this can veer into cliché. The emphasis on ‘exportable Frenchness’ risks reducing the language to aesthetic signifiers rather than expressive nuance. In “Regarde”, the lyrics function more to build atmosphere than as a storytelling device. Theoretically, this should be a strong contender in May. Monroe’s vocal ability alone virtually guarantees a solid jury score, particularly given jurors’ continued appreciation for technically demanding performances. The fusion of opera and pop also aligns with a recurring Eurovision formula that has proven very successful in recent years. My concern lies with the televote. Whilst visually and vocally impressive, “Regarde” may struggle to create an immediate emotional connection. Its polished, almost calculated structure could limit its memorability compared to more distinctive or contemporary entries.

In short, France has delivered a highly competent, strategically designed entry – one that showcases musical ‘quality’ in a traditional sense. But Eurovision success increasingly depends on authenticity and emotional immediacy, and “Regarde” sometimes feels more like a showcase than a statement. A top-ten finish seems likely; a victory, less so.

My Score: 8.5

Poland: Alicja – “Pray”

After the Eurovision Song Contest 2020 was cancelled, most of the participating countries internally selected their chosen artists to represent them the following year. Poland was not one of those: Alicja, who had been due to represent the country with the song “Empires”, was replaced for 2021 by Rafał, who failed to qualify for the final in Rotterdam. This year, however, Alicja will finally be getting her moment on the Eurovision stage after winning the Polish national final back in March. Her competing song, “Pray”, is ambitious, vocally demanding and stylistically restless, though struggles to combine its various elements into a fully satisfying whole. The studio version establishes Alicja’s strongest asset: her voice. With clear R&B and gospel influences, the track opens with a relatively restrained, almost devotional tone before escalating into a more assertive, genre-blending production. There are flashes of sophistication in the arrangement, particularly in the choral backing and dynamic shifts, which suggest a polished and contemporary soundscape. However, the song’s structure is arguably its biggest weakness. Rather than building naturally, it veers between styles, even including hints of hip-hop, without always integrating them smoothly. I’ve seen the package described as feeling like “three separate entries smashed together”, lacking a clear musical identity. Lyrically, “Pray” aims high but lands unevenly. The song is framed as a personal statement about ambition, faith and self-belief, reflecting an ‘artist’s journey’ and readiness for change. But the execution feels cluttered. Lines invoking spirituality (“you told us to pray”) sit alongside more defiant, almost boastful passages, creating a tonal inconsistency. At times, the lyrics can feel like a stream of consciousness – touching on empowerment, religion and career success without fully committing to any one theme. This, to me, makes the emotional core of the song difficult to grasp, even if individual phrases may resonate.

As is often the case, the national final performance served to highlight both the song’s strengths and weaknesses. Vocally, Alicja delivered a precise and powerful performance, reinforcing her status as one of this year’s stronger singers. However, the staging was generally perceived as underwhelming. The performance, pre-recorded and relatively minimal in concept, failed to elevate the song’s narrative or compensate for its structural issues. There was a sense of disconnect between the song’s intensity and the visual presentation, with Alicja appearing somewhat constrained rather than commanding the stage. Subsequent comments from Alicja herself suggest that a complete staging overhaul is planned for Eurovision, acknowledging that the initial concept did not fully land – I think this is definitely needed, and will hopefully bring the package to the next level. At Eurovision, whether “Pray” will manage to make it to the final is uncertain. Alicja’s vocal ability and the song’s blend of genres could appeal to juries, particularly those who appreciate contemporary R&B influences, but the lack of a clear hook and fragmented nature may limit its success. The Polish diaspora often come out in strong support of the country’s Eurovision entries, though recent non-qualifications demonstrate that this isn’t enough by itself. Eurovision audiences tend to respond best to entries with immediate impact, and I don’t think “Pray” is cohesive enough to be fully appreciated in one listen – a factor that could prove to be its undoing in a live competition setting.

In summary, “Pray” is a bold but flawed entry. It showcases Alicja’s artistry and ambition, but feels more like a work in progress than a fully-realised package. With significant improvements in the staging and a more focussed presentation, it could achieve a respectable result – but as things stand, qualification is far from assured, and a top-tier finish seems unlikely.

My Score: 4

Armenia: Simón – “Paloma Rumba”

“Paloma Rumba”, Armenia’s entry for this year’s Eurovision Song Contest, has a clear conceptual hook: escape from the monotony of modern life through rhythm and self-liberation. The idea is relatable and the theme is timely, yet the execution mixes this infectious energy with artistic choices that don’t always feel consistent. The studio version is immediately accessible. Built on a Latin-influenced pop beat – leaning into the song’s “rumba” branding – it fuses dance rhythms with contemporary Eurovision-friendly production. The verses are relatively restrained, almost conversational, before the chorus bursts into a chant-like hook: “Paloma Rumba, let’s go!” This dynamic contrast is effective if somewhat formulaic. The production is polished and ready for radio, but occasionally feels generic, lacking a distinctive sonic identity that would set it apart in a crowded Eurovision field. The instrumental drop and repeated “ole-ole” refrains are catchy, but verge on overused, giving the song a slightly repetitive structure. The lyrics of “Paloma Rumba” are more interesting than the surface-level party vibe may suggest. The song frames a narrative of workplace burnout and personal emancipation – lines such as “I’m not a machine … I’m done for sure” and “this meeting could have been an email” tap into a very modern frustration. The metaphor of the “paloma” (dove) as a symbol of freedom reinforces this theme of breaking away from routine and reclaiming agency. However, the writing is inconsistent. Whilst some lines feel sharply observed and relatable, others lean into cliché or rely on awkward phrasing, diluting the song’s emotional impact. The mix of earnest commentary and party slogans creates and tonal imbalance: it’s not always clear whether the song wants to be a critique of modern work culture or simply a dancefloor anthem.

The music video adds a helpful narrative layer, though it is not particularly innovative. It depicts Simón trapped in an office job before ultimately rejecting it to pursue music, mirroring the song’s lyrical arc. Visually, the video is clean and competently shot, with choreography that emphasises movement and release. However, it leans heavily on familiar tropes – grey office spaces set against vibrant dance sequences – without offering a fresh visual twist. Simón’s charisma carries much of the video, but the storytelling feels predictable rather than compelling. Vocally, Simón delivers a solid performance, though the studio version benefits from production smoothing. His tone suits the song’s energetic style, but there are moments that could be elevated by greater vocal distinction or emotional nuance. As it stands, the vocal is competent but not standout – unlikely to be the song’s primary selling point in a live Eurovision setting. As for its chances at Eurovision, “Paloma Rumba” is competitive in the middle of the pack. Its strengths – catchy chorus, contemporary theme and strong staging potential – make it a plausible qualifier from the semi-final. The song’s accessibility and danceability are clear assets when it comes to the televote. However, its weaknesses – derivative production, lyrical inconsistency and limited uniqueness – may prevent it from garnering widespread jury support. In a year with several high-concept and vocally impressive performances, it risks being perceived as enjoyable but forgettable. Armenia does tend to stage its entries well, and I thought that “Survivor” was one of the most improved entries of last year’s contest when comparing the national final performance to the eventual Eurovision package, so if the delegation manages to perform a similar trick on this song, we could yet be surprised.

In conclusion, “Paloma Rumba” is a well-crafted but slightly safe Eurovision entry. It succeeds as a piece of mainstream pop with a relatable message, but I would say stops short of delivering the originality or emotional depth needed to really excel.

My Score: 7.5