Both were definitely worth watching, but unfortunately I do think that the Olympic opening ceremony was a lot better. The Paralympic Ceremony was touching, and showed how a disability is sometimes an ability, but the Olympic ceremony was a lot more entertaining and it kept you wanting to watch it all the way through. I think this is the case only because of the amount of money pumped into it, and wrongly, the Paralympics were only given a fraction of the budget to create their ceremony.
Whilst I am having a moan, I also believe that the Paralympics should have exactly the same coverage on the television, with uninterrupted footage, and better commentators.
I too have watched both and if pushed I preferred the Opening Ceremony for the Olympics.
And Dan, I agree the TV coverage of the Paralympics is not as good as the BBC, and constant adverts, come back BBC all is forgiven.
It was good most time the Paralympic has less budget. The Olympic had history lesson the Paralympic took a story from Spakespear. It also used unbellera. The flame flying in was one of the best parts.
It did continue the over all theme of the "Tempest" with Prospero and his daughter, Miranda.
It was less spectacular but clever and enjoyable.
If you want Las vegas, vacuous entertainment then go and get your bobs and **** there !
The problem for both ceremonies (in the USA) where the racist and ignorant commentators, perhaps someone who had heard of Shakespeare and Brunel ( we got a taste of that with Channel 4), and those adverts just ruin everything.
Stephen Hawkins wasnt as good as I expected,but overall it was better than the left wing leaning opening ceremony of the main one.
it was crap
Did you enjoy watching london 2012 paralympics opening ceremony? Do you think olympics opening ceremony was better? or you think both were good?
