inthe00s
The Pop Culture Information Society...

These are the messages that have been posted on inthe00s over the past few years.

Check out the messageboard archive index for a complete list of topic areas.

This archive is periodically refreshed with the latest messages from the current messageboard.




Check for new replies or respond here...

Subject: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: Donnie Darko on 05/15/06 at 1:51 am

I'd say 2004. '04 started out weak, and ended strong (except for Bush winning the election of course). 2005 started out strong and ended weak, and seemed to go on forever.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: bbigd04 on 05/15/06 at 1:56 am

Tough call really. I like both years in different ways. I really got into 05 and thought it was so great, but now I don't know. I'm going to say 2004 because 2005 got so crappy at the end.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: bbigd04 on 05/15/06 at 2:07 am


I think this pop cultural year really started around June when "We Belong Together" came out. Prior to that 2005 was an extension of the Bush/Kerry election period. After "We Belong Together" came out '05 got increasingly crappier.


Yea it was around that time. Summer '05 wasn't that bad really though summer '04 definitely was better, it was the fall with "Soul Survivor", "Play", "Run It", "My Humps", T-Pain that sucked horribly.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: bbigd04 on 05/15/06 at 2:11 am


Summer '05 was alright. I really liked Gwen Stefani's "Cool" from then. Fall of '05 sucked. That's when emo really broke out, and a slough of awful, AWFUL rap songs like "Grillz" and "Ms. New Booty" were released.


Very true, emo was kind of dormant for a while before the fall. Then came Fall Out Boy and All American Rejects. I liked "Cool" as well. "Grillz" is disgusting, lol. and "Laffy Taffy" omg just horrible.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: Donnie Darko on 05/15/06 at 2:12 am


Very true, emo was kind of dormant for a while before the fall. Then came Fall Out Boy and All American Rejects. I liked "Cool" as well. "Grillz" is disgusting, lol. and "Laffy Taffy" omg just horrible.


Even though emo has been popular since about 2002, it seems like the fall of 2005 is when people started saying things like "Cheer Up, Emo Kid".

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: bbigd04 on 05/15/06 at 2:14 am


Even though emo has been popular since about 2002, it seems like the fall of 2005 is when people started saying things like "Cheer Up, Emo Kid".


2005 is the year when emo really exploded and become top 10 popular before that emo was popular, but generally not at a top 10 level.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: Marty McFly on 05/15/06 at 2:25 am


I'd say 2004. '04 started out weak, and ended strong (except for Bush winning the election of course). 2005 started out strong and ended weak, and seemed to go on forever.


I agree. If I had to pick one, I'd say '04, although that's partly because it was a slightly better/more fun personal year for me, too. Plus, alot of the songs from the first half of '05 that I like (e.g. Green Day, Gwen Stefani, Killers, The Bravery) were singles that actually came off their respective albums in '04.

Also, since early-mid '04 still felt kinda "early '00s", even that was a little more vibrant/fun than the current late '05/early '06 period (for instance, even the sillier songs like the Black Eyed Peas' "Let's Get it Started" were more fun than stupid - ala "My Humps"). ;D

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: bbigd04 on 05/15/06 at 2:26 am


I agree. If I had to pick one, I'd say '04, although that's partly because it was a slightly better/more fun personal year for me, too. Plus, alot of the songs from the first half of '05 that I like (e.g. Green Day, Gwen Stefani, Killers, The Bravery) were singles that actually came off their respective albums in '04.

Also, since early-mid '04 still felt kinda "early '00s", even that was a little more vibrant/fun than the current late '05/early '06 period (for instance, even the sillier songs like the Black Eyed Peas' "Let's Get it Started" were more fun than stupid - ala "My Humps"). ;D


That's true, I like those songs you mentioned as well and they did come out in late '04 so yea I choose 2004.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: bbigd04 on 05/15/06 at 2:31 am


Yeah I agree. Again I think 2004 was special because of the elections, which naturally carried over good music into 2005.  I think when "We Belong Together" came out the "pop cultural 2004" was over.


The Killers really faded away fast, they were all the talk in Spring '05 now nobody cares about them really.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: bbigd04 on 05/15/06 at 2:34 am


That's true.  Would you say the summer of '05 marked a change in taste? It seems nu metal, Gwen Stefani, and the neo wave kind of died out around June of '05. 


Yea Stefani's gone as well. Yea I would say so it marked a change from the late 04-early '05 taste definitely.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: Marty McFly on 05/15/06 at 2:34 am


Yeah I agree. Again I think 2004 was special because of the elections, which naturally carried over good music into 2005.  I think when "We Belong Together" came out the "pop cultural 2004" was over.


I agree. I wonder if it would've been slightly different and more like late '04 for longer if she hadn't had her (IMO awful ;) ) comeback? As of now, there's only, like, three or four 2006 songs I'm into. I think it's been a decent year for movies so far, though.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: bbigd04 on 05/15/06 at 2:36 am


"Cool" was not a popular song, considering how big "Hollaback Girl".  Even "We Belong Together" seemed to be big primarily because of airplay.


Yea "Cool" did not do so well, only "Hollaback Girl" was a HUGE success, though "Cool" got a good amount of airplay. "We Belong Together" was huge but it didn't sell so greatly, mostly it was due to airplay.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: bbigd04 on 05/15/06 at 2:39 am


Yeah, '05 was freaking awful for movies.  Although Sin City was very good.

I think Mariah also inspired a slough of crappy R&B, like Pussycat Dolls. The only good new R&B artist from '05 is Rihanna.


Rihanna really isn't R&B, she's more of a danceclub pop artist. Neither are PCD actually, they are dance pop as well. Chris Brown though is crappy R&B and a wannabe Usher.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: Marty McFly on 05/15/06 at 2:40 am


"Cool" was not a popular song, considering how big "Hollaback Girl".  Even "We Belong Together" seemed to be big primarily because of airplay.


I like "Cool" ALOT better than "Hollaback" (which is still a good song), but it seems almost like a novelty, or something that'll be a "lost '00s" hit when viewed from, say 2020. Kinda like how Huey Lewis' "The Heart of Rock and Roll" was a widely known hit, but a song like, say, "Walking on a Thin Line" is more of a "tied to the '80s" hit.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: bbigd04 on 05/15/06 at 2:42 am


That's a good point. Rihanna's more like dancehall, I guess.  PCD are what I'd call "dirrrty pop", like Britney or Christina's later work.  Chris Brown is freaking awful; I can't stand him.


I know I hate him, lol. He has no talent and a whiny annoying voice that sucks.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: bbigd04 on 05/15/06 at 2:43 am


Yeah. Cool actually sounds like a New Wave song, like something Cyndi Lauper would have put out in 1984. 

Speaking of "Heart of Rock and Roll", yesterday I went to this '50s-style fast food restaurant, and said as a joke "Did you know the Heart of Rock and Roll is still beating?"  And five minutes later, the Huey Lewis song plays in the restaurant!  ;D


That's true Cool sounds very '80s like.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: bbigd04 on 05/15/06 at 2:45 am


I think I'm the better 16 year old musician of 2006  ;D


You probably are, anybody is better than Chris Brown. His worst song is Yo excuse me miss because it shows off how crappy his voice really is.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: bbigd04 on 05/15/06 at 2:47 am


I wonder if it's lack of '00s urbanity is why it was not that popular.


Possibly, it just doesn't sound like an '00s song and doesn't fit. There's always some songs like that. What you waiting for did even worse than Cool, it also didn't really sound '00s. Hollaback Girl though fits with the '00s.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: bbigd04 on 05/15/06 at 2:48 am


I know ... Juelz Santana is terrible too. "The Whistle Song" has no melody whatsoever as far as I can tell.  ;D


I hate that song too, that guy really sucks.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: Marty McFly on 05/15/06 at 2:49 am


Yeah. Cool actually sounds like a New Wave song, like something Cyndi Lauper would have put out in 1984. 

Speaking of "Heart of Rock and Roll", yesterday I went to this '50s-style fast food restaurant, and said as a joke "Did you know the Heart of Rock and Roll is still beating?"  And five minutes later, the Huey Lewis song plays in the restaurant!  ;D


I love when stuff like that happens - cool story, btw. :)

Yeah, "Cool" is alot like 1985-ish new wave pop with some '00s modifications, much like several '80s songs which sounded like '50s/60s music that was '80s modified (i.e. Billy Joel's "Keeping the Faith").

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: Marty McFly on 05/15/06 at 3:00 am


Thanks :)

"Cool" actually sounds completely '80s ... it's like an anomaly.  There's almost nothing '00s about "Cool".


You know what? I just realized an odd paradox. As I've often mentioned, I think we, as a whole, are slightly less "trendy" and likely to hate on the past than before (for instance, alot of teens seem to openly dig classic rock or their parents' stuff, etc). Also, the overall structure of pop culture hasn't massively changed since 1997.

The '80s, arguably, was alot "instantly trendier" than the '00s (hell, 1978 was totally dated in 1981, and '81 was dated by '83), but older styled songs that didn't really sound that "80s" were still able to become hits pretty easily. For example, John Fogerty's "The Old Man Down the Road" is almost like vintage late '60s, and it went Top 10. Same with Stray Cats, etc etc.

Yet today, unless a song sounds TOTALLY '00s, it probably won't be that popular. Weird, isn't it? ;)

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: bbigd04 on 05/15/06 at 3:02 am


You know what? I just realized an odd paradox. As I've often mentioned, I think we, as a whole, are slightly less "trendy" and likely to hate on the past than before (for instance, alot of teens seem to openly dig classic rock or their parents' stuff, etc). Also, the overall structure of pop culture hasn't massively changed since 1997.

The '80s, arguably, was alot "instantly trendier" than the '00s (hell, 1978 was totally dated in 1981, and '81 was dated by '83), but older styled songs that didn't really sound that "80s" were still able to become hits pretty easily. For example, John Fogerty's "The Old Man Down the Road" is almost like vintage late '60s, and it went Top 10. Same with Stray Cats, etc etc.

Yet today, unless a song sounds TOTALLY '00s, it probably won't be that popular. Weird, isn't it? ;)


Yea that's how things are today, though there are some surprises here and there.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: Marty McFly on 05/15/06 at 3:18 am


That is weird, huh? It's like the trendy people control the main charts, and the other people like old stuff.  I think this may be because in the '80s there was less media choice, so EVERYONE who liked music, not just people in the 9-26 age bracket had a say in the charts.


That's true, not as many of us like/agree with the trendies' choices now, but they're almost more powerful than they were in the '80s. ;)

Also, I bet since music videos were huge, yet at the same time, still new (and thus cool from a trendy perspective in itself), that turned on, say a 14-year old in 1984 to older styled music that sounded somewhat '50s or '60s.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: batfan2005 on 05/15/06 at 6:03 pm

It's hard to pick because both of those years were way better than 2006. 2004 had better music, but 2005 had better movies. If I had to pick which year I had more good memories from and remembering when I was overall happier, I'll have to go with 2004. I miss the good ole days!

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: batfan2005 on 05/15/06 at 6:16 pm


Tough call really. I like both years in different ways. I really got into 05 and thought it was so great, but now I don't know. I'm going to say 2004 because 2005 got so crappy at the end.


I agree with you there. Late 2005 was when things became the way it is now, in early 2006. I really liked the late 2004/early 2005 pop-culture year.

Subject: Re: 2004 or 2005?

Written By: sonikuu on 05/15/06 at 7:24 pm

I'd have to say it's quite close.  I personally think the last half of 2004 and the first 10 months or so of 2005 were the best time period for the 00's ever.  For that brief period of time, I actually loved the 00's.  Great movies, music started to get better, reality tv died out in favor of nightime drama (like Lost and Desperate Housewives), it just seemed like all the things I disliked about the 00's up to that point were all fading away and being replaced by much better things.  Unfortunately, the last few months of 2005 ruined it, with Chris Brown, Fall Out Boy, and the Mariah Carey comeback. 

2006 is the typical lackluster year that tends to appear after a few kickass years, almost as if to balance it out so things don't kick TOO much ass.  It does have it's moments though.  The new Pearl Jam and Red Hot Chili Peppers albums are excellent and most of the tv shows I watched in 2005 are still on the air.  It's better than the early 00's, at least.  I'll take Emo over Nu-Metal and Drama over Reality TV any day of the week.

Check for new replies or respond here...