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: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: imrane on 02/01/20 at 11:54 am

At the same time? It's like they had some trends from 2003 and 2004 but in a darker twist (darker clothes, too). While 2003 was closer to 9/11, it was quite a shiny-looking and colorful year, ditto for 2004. Yet 2005 was way more somber looking. I think emo also peaked in 2005-2007? In 2008 and especially 2009 there was a move to more colorful fashion and happier-sounding music.

But what caused the shift in late 2004/early 2005? I can't think of any reasons.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: 2001 on 02/01/20 at 12:22 pm

It just happened to be the aesthetic of the time, I don't think there was a deeper meaning behind it. Millennials funnelled their teen angst into depression music. Goth was already taking off in 2002, it just wasn't called emo yet.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: piecesof93 on 02/01/20 at 1:18 pm

The only really dark year to me was 2007, "dark and digital."

The aesthetic was darker and somber. Of course with the emo trend being popular but also just in general. I didn't know many real life emos in 2007 but even non-emos wore more somber outfits consisting of lots of plain gray, brown and black.

https://media.glamour.com/photos/569592cd93ef4b09520d239f/master/w_1600%2Cc_limit/fashion-2014-10-kim-2008-main.jpg

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/_aqhI2rsw0AE/R1F0jyOIKbI/AAAAAAAAKkg/yCl4cstntB4/s1600-R/at2.jpg

The popularity of brands like ed hardy also made things look darker imo.

Also if you look at a lot of videos from that time, they are very dark compared to previous years. This applies across genres too.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: mc98 on 02/01/20 at 2:34 pm

Vests are very late 2000s.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: Slim95 on 02/01/20 at 4:21 pm

I don't know why people always put 2005 in with it. 2006 is when it started getting dark, that was the first late 2000s year. There's really not that much difference between 2004 and 2005. But a lot of difference between 2005 and 2006 (especially late 2006).

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: 2001 on 02/01/20 at 4:29 pm


I don't know why people always put 2005 in with it. 2006 is when it started getting dark, that was the first late 2000s year. There's really not that much difference between 2004 and 2005. But a lot of difference between 2005 and 2006 (especially late 2006).


It was 2004 when the emo aesthetic got popular. Blink 182, Avril Lavigne, Green Day, Sum 41, Simple Plan, pretty much any band you can think of, all had a dark look in 2004.

Blink 182 2003

https://images.kerrangcdn.com/Blink2003_WebHeader.jpg?auto=compress&fit=crop&w=2016&h=1134

Green Day 2004

https://media.altpress.com/uploads/2019/09/green-day-ap-cover.jpg

Avril Lavigne 2004

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/07/Under_My_Skin_%28Avril_Lavigne_album%29_cover.png

I would post tons more but there's a 3 image limit now

These bands were producing happy upbeat skater/pop punk music in the Y2K era, but by 2004 they "matured with their audience" and came out with sadder music.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: Slim95 on 02/01/20 at 10:37 pm

I misunderstood because I just looked at the title. I thought OP was talking about "dark" like things starting to get bad culturally.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: Zelek3 on 02/02/20 at 12:16 am

Honestly I think the late 2006 shift is rather over-exaggerated (shamefully I used to believe in it and propagate it, lol).

Mid-late 2005 was already firmly "new school" with stuff like the Xbox 360, emo's breakthrough, The Office, post-movie Spongebob, post-cancellation Family Guy, Shadow the hedgehog, Bush's approval ratings dipping below 50%, YouTube, Web 2.0, Nintendo DS, Ben 10, ringtone rap (D4L, Dem Franchise Boyz, Yin Yang Twins), broadband Internet, Camp Lazlo, Myspace, etc. By then culture was far removed from the Y2K era (1998-2003).

I don't see why some people think 2005 was part of the same zeitgeist as 2002 or something.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: Zelek3 on 02/02/20 at 12:29 am


But what caused the shift in late 2004/early 2005? I can't think of any reasons.


Bush's re-election and the rise of Hot Topic, Myspace, and Web 2.0.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: DisneysRetro on 02/02/20 at 5:34 pm

2005 was pretty fun and shiny. That summer was really hot. We had good feeling jams like hollaback girl, we belong together, Shake it off, etc. 2007/2008 is when life for me started to feel dark. Especially during the recession. It impacted the people in my surroundings very hard...

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: DisneysRetro on 02/02/20 at 7:26 pm


Bush's re-election and the rise of Hot Topic, Myspace, and Web 2.0.


It was more like a transition. 2005/2006 was when things started really shifting. By late 2006 there was a different feeling in terms of pop culture and childhood culture. 2004-2005 still felt early 2000’s in the childhood department. 

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: Zelek3 on 02/02/20 at 8:07 pm


It was more like a transition. 2005/2006 was when things started really shifting. By late 2006 there was a different feeling in terms of pop culture and childhood culture. 2004-2005 still felt early 2000’s in the childhood department.

2004-early 2005 had some early 2000s elements in terms of childhood, like for example Revenge of the Sith, but it was shifting. By mid-late 2005 it didn't feel early 2000s anymore; I distinctly remember feeling that Nickelodeon was becoming gutted/soulless then, with the exception of Avatar. The non-Avatar shows at the time like Spongebob season 4, Zoey 101, Unfabulous, Mr. Meaty, The Xs, and Catscratch felt soulless to me.

Cartoon network was also headed downhill at the time though slower than Nick, as the CN City bumpers kept some flare alive.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: imrane on 02/03/20 at 3:35 am

Disney Channel, however was getting more interesting imo (Suite Life, HM, Wizards of WP, etc.), one of the few good points of 2006-2008 before the EDM/music cultural shift led by Katy Perry and Gaga. The only early 2000s memorable show there was Lizzie McGuire. As a 1988 born I watched DC in 2006-2014 as in 2000-2005 it was nothing special and too preachy (back then I prefered CN and FoxKids/Jetix).

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: DisneysRetro on 02/03/20 at 2:08 pm


2004-early 2005 had some early 2000s elements in terms of childhood, like for example Revenge of the Sith, but it was shifting. By mid-late 2005 it didn't feel early 2000s anymore; I distinctly remember feeling that Nickelodeon was becoming gutted/soulless then, with the exception of Avatar. The non-Avatar shows at the time like Spongebob season 4, Zoey 101, Unfabulous, Mr. Meaty, The Xs, and Catscratch felt soulless to me.

Cartoon network was also headed downhill at the time though slower than Nick, as the CN City bumpers kept some flare alive.


I agree I feel like mid- late 2005 is when things started changing. When ever I think of the mid 2000’s my brain automatically thinks of summer of 2005-2006 rather than 2004 if that makes sense. I feel like the 2005-2006 school year was like Peak mid 2000’s. The whole hurricane Katrina that was going ion in late August/ early September, the toys that were being manufactured in the early 2000’s were being discontinued around this time and new shows like Suite life of Zack and Cody and Hannah Montana started. Early 2000’s shows were still shown in reruns but only at night :(

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: Slim95 on 02/03/20 at 2:12 pm


2004-early 2005 had some early 2000s elements in terms of childhood, like for example Revenge of the Sith, but it was shifting. By mid-late 2005 it didn't feel early 2000s anymore; I distinctly remember feeling that Nickelodeon was becoming gutted/soulless then, with the exception of Avatar. The non-Avatar shows at the time like Spongebob season 4, Zoey 101, Unfabulous, Mr. Meaty, The Xs, and Catscratch felt soulless to me.

Cartoon network was also headed downhill at the time though slower than Nick, as the CN City bumpers kept some flare alive.

Early 2000s completely died in the 2002 - 2003 school year.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: shadowcookie on 02/03/20 at 2:19 pm


Early 2000s completely died in the 2002 - 2003 school year.

In your opinion, of course.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: mc98 on 02/03/20 at 2:44 pm


Early 2000s completely died in the 2002 - 2003 school year.

How so? Skater pop punk and nu-metal were still popular.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: Slim95 on 02/03/20 at 2:57 pm


How so? Skater pop punk and nu-metal were still popular.

Many new mid 2000s trends started appearing and the mood and vibe changed after 2002. I guess I don't have to say "completely died" but we were already in mid 2000s culture in 2003 in my opinion.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: Sman12 on 02/03/20 at 7:08 pm

Emo culture became a popular fad during that time, so maybe that's why.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: batfan2005 on 02/03/20 at 8:33 pm


Honestly I think the late 2006 shift is rather over-exaggerated (shamefully I used to believe in it and propagate it, lol).

Mid-late 2005 was already firmly "new school" with stuff like the Xbox 360, emo's breakthrough, The Office, post-movie Spongebob, post-cancellation Family Guy, Shadow the hedgehog, Bush's approval ratings dipping below 50%, YouTube, Web 2.0, Nintendo DS, Ben 10, ringtone rap (D4L, Dem Franchise Boyz, Yin Yang Twins), broadband Internet, Camp Lazlo, Myspace, etc. By then culture was far removed from the Y2K era (1998-2003).

I don't see why some people think 2005 was part of the same zeitgeist as 2002 or something.


There's posters on here who insist that 2006 is the year everything changed, and it is not debatable. They'll even mention some of the things you listed as 2006 things to support their argument.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: Slim95 on 02/03/20 at 8:39 pm


There's posters on here who insist that 2006 is the year everything changed, and it is not debatable. They'll even mention some of the things you listed as 2006 things to support their argument.

A handful of stuff changed in 2006, there was a shift, no doubt about that. But "everything" changed in 2008.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: DisneysRetro on 02/03/20 at 9:51 pm


Early 2000s completely died in the 2002 - 2003 school year.


Not at all. More like 2004-2005 school year. That was the school year where broadband out sold dial up, mid 2000’s culture started to slightly emerge, cartoon network and Nickelodeon ended their original cartoons, etc. 2002-2003 was like Peak early 2000’s Especially musically and in terms of kid culture. People used film cameras more so then digital, ipods were practically non existent and cd players were epitome of listening to music. In the mid 2000’s ipods were common and digital cameras started to replace film. Ashanti’s Album dominated summer-winter of 2002, there’s no way that album is mid 2000’s. There’s no way I can look at Usher’s confessions part 2 or Burn (2004) and call that a mid 2000’s song... Certain songs like “Yeah” was like the beginning of crunk  which started in mid to late 2004 with Ciara and yin yang twins and took over the mid 2000’s. Kanye’s first album College Dropout released in late 2004 is definitely not mid 2000’s. Maybe the ending of the Y2k era was around 2002 or so but 2001- mid 2004 was still solidly early 2000’s. Late 2004- mid 2006 is mid 2000’s. Late 2006 afterwards is late 2000’s at least culturally.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: Slim95 on 02/03/20 at 10:25 pm

No, 2004 - 2005 school year was peak mid 2000s.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: DisneysRetro on 02/04/20 at 1:36 am


No, 2004 - 2005 school year was peak mid 2000s.


I always thought Peak Mid 2000’s would have been 2005-2006 when emo/ Crunk and Cell Phone rap hit it’s peak ?? 2004-2005 had too many early 2000’s influences for it to be peak mid 2000’s. I mean a majority of America was still using Dial Up modems in the 2004-2005 school year to access internet and youtube didn’t exist. Shrek 2 doesn’t strike me as a mid 2000’s movie either. All the green go-gurts, green ketchup and tooth paste that was marketed towards children in 2004 was more early 2000’s than mid imo. But I can see how 2004-2005 could be peak mid 2000’s mainly bc I don’t see 2006 as a true mid 2000’s year  culturally.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: piecesof93 on 02/04/20 at 4:28 am

The peak mid 2000s was 2004-2005. 2003 is a transitional year into the mid 2000s. It's still early 2000s but mid 2000s elements begin to creep in. You all already know the main elements of the mid 2000s so I won't list them again. However, the pinnacle of the mid 2000s
has to include the presence of reggaeton & dancehall, soca, or reggae fusion in mainstream music. The 2000s were more than just ringtone music & emo. There were lots of other subgenres flourishing and some of that took place in the mid 2000s.

Reggaeton was only popular in mid 2000s, it was dead mainstream wise in the early and late 2000s. Dancehall, which I consider a mid 2000s genre, started gaining lots of mainstream traction in 2003 with artists like Sean Paul but extented itself onto 2004 & 2005. The late & very early 2000s did not allow much room for these genres to thrive on the radio, therefore, they are key indicators that 2004-2005 are the peak of the mid 2000s.

Crunk music is more early-mid 2000s. Crunk didn't start with "Yeah" or even put crunk music in the mainstream. It was Lil Jon & the East Side Boyz in the 2002-2003 era that put crunk music on the map as "Get Low" was all over the place. It was like the "Back That A** Up" of 2003. "Yeah" only started the Crunk n B trend. The peak of Crunk music lasted from half of 2003 - 2005 aka the mid 2000s. 2006 was when crunk music had to start making way for the dominance of snap & ringtone music. Crunk was out of the picture in the late 2000s. Snap music is more late 2000s.

2007 was the peak of the emo. That's when they were everywhere. All over myspace, YouTube, music videos, in schools, all over the place.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: DisneysRetro on 02/04/20 at 6:38 am


The peak mid 2000s was 2004-2005. 2003 is a transitional year into the mid 2000s. It's still early 2000s but mid 2000s elements begin to creep in. You all already know the main elements of the mid 2000s so I won't list them again. However, the pinnacle of the mid 2000s
has to include the presence of reggaeton & dancehall, soca, or reggae fusion in mainstream music. The 2000s were more than just ringtone music & emo. There were lots of other subgenres flourishing and some of that took place in the mid 2000s.

Reggaeton was only popular in mid 2000s, it was dead mainstream wise in the early and late 2000s. Dancehall, which I consider a mid 2000s genre, started gaining lots of mainstream traction in 2003 with artists like Sean Paul but extented itself onto 2004 & 2005. The late & very early 2000s did not allow much room for these genres to thrive on the radio, therefore, they are key indicators that 2004-2005 are the peak of the mid 2000s.

Crunk music is more early-mid 2000s. Crunk didn't start with "Yeah" or even put crunk music in the mainstream. It was Lil Jon & the East Side Boyz in the 2002-2003 era that put crunk music on the map as "Get Low" was all over the place. It was like the "Back That A** Up" of 2003. "Yeah" only started the Crunk n B trend. The peak of Crunk music lasted from half of 2003 - 2005 aka the mid 2000s. 2006 was when crunk music had to start making way for the dominance of snap & ringtone music. Crunk was out of the picture in the late 2000s. Snap music is more late 2000s.

2007 was the peak of the emo. That's when they were everywhere. All over myspace, YouTube, music videos, in schools, all over the place.


I only used “Yeah” as an example sound of crunk music in the mid 2000’s. I remember Get Low in 2002-2003 I was in elementary school but it sounded nothing like Peety Pablo’s beats of the mid 2000’s with songs like Yeah, Freak-A-Leak, Goodies, Salt Shaker, etc which started around 2004... 2003 for the most part was not really saturated in much crunk music. Stepping/snap music really made a name for its self in 2005 with The franchise boyz and the whole lean with it rock with it thing. Then the Laffy Taffy dance/song became a hit in late 2005- early 2006. In fact it really started with the 80’s revival that Ciara and Missy brought back in 2005 with 1,2 step and Loose Control which was a mixture of both crunk and step. By 2007 stepping music was dead. It was all about the soulja boy...

Reggae fusion really got put on the map in 2001 after the release of “Girls dem sugar” by Mya and Beanie Man and Shaggy’s Angel/It wasn’t me. In 2002 Janet Jackson released “Feel it Boy” which took over the summer of ‘02. Sean Paul also became big around 2003. Crunk music already had it’s roots in the late 90’s with Master P’s 1997 hit “make em say uhh” and Project Pat’s “Chicken head” in 2001. Again this has nothing to do with peak mid 2000’s years. The peak of mid 2000’s would be 2005-2006 when Gwen Stefani released “Hollaback Girl”, Mariah Carey released “We Belong together” and Black eyed Peas released “My Humps”. There’s no way R&B in 2003 can even compare to 2005. Alicia Keys’s  Diary, Mario Winans, Beyoncé’s Me myself and I, Justin Timberlakes “Rock your body”. Even Juvenile’s “Slow Motion” sounds more early 2000’s than mid.

Also Get Low was not anywhere near equivalent to Juvi’s back that a** up in 1999-2000. That song literally stayed on the hot 100’s for nearly a year. Hell even I remember when it was big and I was a preschooler when that whole cash money records era took place around 1999-2001 with songs like Bling Blong and I need a hot girl...Get Low was just another crunk song that was replaced by many more after 2003 or so. Southern hip hop started to become bigger in the late 90’s especially after Trina and Trick daddy around 1998-1999ish.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: piecesof93 on 02/04/20 at 8:47 am

I only used “Yeah” as an example sound of crunk music in the mid 2000’s. I remember Get Low in 2002-2003 I was in elementary school but it sounded nothing like Peety Pablo’s beats of the mid 2000’s with songs like Yeah, Freak-A-Leak, Goodies, Salt Shaker, etc which started around 2004..2003 for the most part was not really saturated in much crunk music.

-This has no relevance to my comment as it does nothing to address the popularity of the song. Whether you think the songs sound similar or not, they all fall under the category of Crunk and all have helped make it a household genre of the mid 2000s. You seem to be implying that Lil Jon's music in 2003, sounded very different from Lil Jon (or songs he produced) from 2004+. He has released songs with similar beats to the ones you listed prior to "Get Low" such as "I Don't Give A-" There was no massive change in direction. "Get Low" was just one song. 2003 is apart of crunks peak because this was the year the genre made a breakthrough, reaching the top 10 on billboard.

Stepping/snap music really made a name for its self in 2005 with The franchise boyz and the whole lean with it rock with it thing. Then the Laffy Taffy dance/song became a hit in late 2005- early 2006.

Laffy Taffy went #1 on billboard first but Lean Wit it Rock Wit it what started the movement. Lean Wit It, Rock Wit it was released as a single in 2006, the video was released in 2006, and it went to the top 10 on billboard in 2006 and grew from there.

In fact it really started with the 80’s revival that Ciara and Missy brought back in 2005 with 1,2 step and Loose Control which was a mixture of both crunk and step. By 2007 stepping music was dead. It was all about the soulja boy...

- Snap music didn't die by 2007. Even using your example, Souljaboys album featured snap music, he even says "Snap or Die" & I'm a "Snap Star" on his song "Snap & Roll" off his 2007 album. Crank Dat is a snap song.

Reggae fusion really got put on the map in 2001 after the release of “Girls dem sugar” by Mya and Beanie Man and Shaggy’s Angel/It wasn’t me. In 2002 Janet Jackson released “Feel it Boy” which took over the summer of ‘02. Sean Paul also became big around 2003.

- So you are just going to ignore my mentions of dancehall and soca. These are sporadic hits. In 2003-2004, you had a variety of caribbean artists releasing reggae fusion, dancehall, soca, etc that is the difference between what you mentioned and what I mentioned. Wayne Wonder, Kevin Lyttle, Sean Paul, Elephant Man, Nina Sky, Rupee artist from 2003-2004

Crunk music already had it’s roots in the late 90’s with Master P’s 1997 hit “make em say uhh” and Project Pat’s “Chicken head” in 2001.

-Again, this has nothing to do with my comment. Crunks roots go further than that, but that is completely irrelevant because it was not a household genre in the 90s.

Again this has nothing to do with peak mid 2000’s years. The peak of mid 2000’s would be 2005-2006 when Gwen Stefani released “Hollaback Girl”, Mariah Carey released “We Belong together” and Black eyed Peas released “My Humps”. There’s no way R&B in 2003 can even compare to 2005. Alicia Keys’s  Diary, Mario Winans, Beyoncé’s Me myself and I, Justin Timberlakes “Rock your body”. Even Juvenile’s “Slow Motion” sounds more early 2000’s than mid.

Also Get Low was not anywhere near equivalent to Juvi’s back that a** up in 1999-2000. That song literally stayed on the hot 100’s for nearly a year. Hell even I remember when it was big and I was a preschooler when that whole cash money records era took place around 1999-2001 with songs like Bling Blong and I need a hot girl...Get Low was just another crunk song that was replaced by many more after 2003 or so. Southern hip hop started to become bigger in the late 90’s especially after Trina and Trick daddy around 1998-1999ish.

--I compared Get Low to Juvenile because they were both monster hits at parties
I was old enough to attend middle school parties (yes the song is age inappropriate) where Get Low would come on. Everyone got hype when it came on and it was the way for several years after 2003, so no it was not "just another crunk song." It was the song that advanced crunks place in mainstream music. It doesn't matter if other crunk songs came before it.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: piecesof93 on 02/04/20 at 9:01 am

I came believe it but my division of the 2000s is starting to become similar to Slims and our reasons are not even based on the same criteria. I don't agree that the early 2000s died completely 2002-2003 but I do think 2003 is a transitional year and the later half is mid 2000s and that the later half of 2006 is the late 2000s.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: Slim95 on 02/04/20 at 12:17 pm


I came believe it but my division of the 2000s is starting to become similar to Slims and our reasons are not even based on the same criteria. I don't agree that the early 2000s died completely 2002-2003 but I do think 2003 is a transitional year and the later half is mid 2000s and that the later half of 2006 is the late 2000s.

I pretty much agree with that.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: DisneysRetro on 02/04/20 at 5:22 pm

Well I’d say it’s It’s relevant because I can take crunk music from the mid 90’s and apply them to my argument. You are stating how there’s no relevance in doing so by comparing a relatively popular song to songs that didn’t make the hot 100’s such as “I don’t give a..” I get it. You’re trying to make a point. But you are contradicting yourself with that argument considering you are talking about a song that made the top 10’s and then stating how it was the precursor to crunk when crunk/southern music was already beginning to become popular in the late 90’s. Get Low was released in 2002 before crunk was even mainstream in 2004+. Crunk music was not dominating the charts in 2003 either. It was not a household genre in 2002-2003. But by 2004 when the songs I listed came on the scene it became more relevant. The Cadillac, air force ones, bling bling grillz and white tee aesthetic became the staple of hip hop during the mid 2000’s which was not the case for 2003.

Also the genre you mentioned with the reggae fusion and dancehall already became popular by 1999-2000 like I said. The precursors to what was started in 2003-2004 had already been done by the late 90’s to early 2000’s. Wayne Wonder was already making hits in the 90’s And super early 2000’s such as “Watching You” in 2000. He also uses Lumidee’s beat in his famous 2003 song. And some of the artists you mentioned like Elephant man was not dominating the charts in the early 2000’s. My dad is a huge fan of ja rastafarian culture so that type of music was always around in my childhood but they were sub cultures and not pop culture at the time. Nina Skye came out in 2004 around the same time Kevin lyttle released “turn me on”. My mom met him at a club in 2004.



Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: piecesof93 on 02/04/20 at 6:44 pm

I only brought up I Dont Give A because of that minuscule detail brought up about Low not "sounding" like other Crunk songs. That song was not even included in my original reponse/argument. It just sounded like you were implying crunk "switched" sounds from 2003 to 2004. Get Low doesn't have to sound exactly like P Pablo, if it allowed other songs that sound like "I Dont Give A-" or Freak a Leak to chart high on the charts because the genre as a whole was being brought to the spotlight.

I really don't think it's that difficult to understand that a song that makes the top 10 propels a genre into the mainstream. Project Pat & Master P did not score top 10 hits with their singles. It was after Lil Jon's Get Low that crunk songs were able to reach the top 10 on the billboard. It was after he had that hit Crunk had a significant impact on music, eventually leading it to influence other genres such as R&B. None of that means that artists before him did not make crunk music.

I've already addressed the other part of your comment but those Wayne Wonder songs didn't even chart in the US & I never said Elephant man was mainstream in the early 2000s. I'm saying he is apart of the mid 2000s. I consider 2003 to be transitional, not fully early 2000s but partially mid 2000s.

Edit: I just looked at my original comment and I did say that Lil Jon & TESB put crunk of the map in the 2002-2003 era. I included 2002 because that's when their album was released. I don't consider that year to be apart of crunk peak in popularity as I try to clarify a couple sentences later.

Essentially, what I'm getting at is the mid 2000s had a great outlook for Caribbean artists. Soca, Reggae Fusion, Reggaeton, and Dancehall were all flourishing along side each other simultaneously, rather than "token" artists having a hit here and there. We saw Caribbean artist having an impact through multiple genres at the same time. That is what makes this period different than the early & late 2000s and why I consider it an element of the mid 2000s. That is not synonymous with saying a dancehall or reggae fusion artist never had a hit prior the mid 2000s or after the mid 2000s.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: DisneysRetro on 02/05/20 at 3:14 pm


I only brought up I Dont Give A because of that minuscule detail brought up about Low not "sounding" like other Crunk songs. That song was not even included in my original reponse/argument. It just sounded like you were implying crunk "switched" sounds from 2003 to 2004. Get Low doesn't have to sound exactly like P Pablo, if it allowed other songs that sound like "I Dont Give A-" or Freak a Leak to chart high on the charts because the genre as a whole was being brought to the spotlight.

I really don't think it's that difficult to understand that a song that makes the top 10 propels a genre into the mainstream. Project Pat & Master P did not score top 10 hits with their singles. It was after Lil Jon's Get Low that crunk songs were able to reach the top 10 on the billboard. It was after he had that hit Crunk had a significant impact on music, eventually leading it to influence other genres such as R&B. None of that means that artists before him did not make crunk music.

I've already addressed the other part of your comment but those Wayne Wonder songs didn't even chart in the US & I never said Elephant man was mainstream in the early 2000s. I'm saying he is apart of the mid 2000s. I consider 2003 to be transitional, not fully early 2000s but partially mid 2000s.

Edit: I just looked at my original comment and I did say that Lil Jon & TESB put crunk of the map in the 2002-2003 era. I included 2002 because that's when their album was released. I don't consider that year to be apart of crunk peak in popularity as I try to clarify a couple sentences later.

Essentially, what I'm getting at is the mid 2000s had a great outlook for Caribbean artists. Soca, Reggae Fusion, Reggaeton, and Dancehall were all flourishing along side each other simultaneously, rather than "token" artists having a hit here and there. We saw Caribbean artist having an impact through multiple genres at the same time. That is what makes this period different than the early & late 2000s and why I consider it an element of the mid 2000s. That is not synonymous with saying a dancehall or reggae fusion artist never had a hit prior the mid 2000s or after the mid 2000s.


Ahh that makes sense. And Wayne Wonder’s “No Letting Go” definitely charted here in the US. It was at number 11 on the hot 100’s by mid 2003. His Watching You song in 2000 was more underground reggae fusion. It was played at clubs back in 2000-2001.

My main point about project pat and Master P is that despite their songs not making it to the top 10’s, their music was popular amongst the black community and it was the precursor to crunk music. Credit deserves to be given where it is due. A lot of that Caribbean, soca and reggae fusion died by 2005 after oye mi canto. I don’t remember it being a thing in 2006 tbh. But it was big from 2003-2005... I still feel that 2004 was more transitional than 2003. 2003-2004 was still early 2000’s. 2004-2005 was transitional however more mid 2000’s and 2005-2006 was the peak of mid 2000’s culture... Movies like ATL always remind me of the mid 2000’s where as movies like You Got Served remind more of the early 2000’s than mid.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: mwalker1996 on 02/05/20 at 6:47 pm


Ahh that makes sense. And Wayne Wonder’s “No Letting Go” definitely charted here in the US. It was at number 11 on the hot 100’s by mid 2003. His Watching You song in 2000 was more underground reggae fusion. It was played at clubs back in 2000-2001.

My main point about project pat and Master P is that despite their songs not making it to the top 10’s, their music was popular amongst the black community and it was the precursor to crunk music. Credit deserves to be given where it is due. A lot of that Caribbean, soca and reggae fusion died by 2005 after oye mi canto. I don’t remember it being a thing in 2006 tbh. But it was big from 2003-2005... I still feel that 2004 was more transitional than 2003. 2003-2004 was still early 2000’s. 2004-2005 was transitional however more mid 2000’s and 2005-2006 was the peak of mid 2000’s culture... Movies like ATL always remind me of the mid 2000’s where as movies like You Got Served remind more of the early 2000’s than mid.
Sean Paul Temperature came out in 06 and have a carribben sound.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: piecesof93 on 02/05/20 at 7:12 pm


Ahh that makes sense. And Wayne Wonder’s “No Letting Go” definitely charted here in the US. It was at number 11 on the hot 100’s by mid 2003. His Watching You song in 2000 was more underground reggae fusion. It was played at clubs back in 2000-2001.

My main point about project pat and Master P is that despite their songs not making it to the top 10’s, their music was popular amongst the black community and it was the precursor to crunk music. Credit deserves to be given where it is due. A lot of that Caribbean, soca and reggae fusion died by 2005 after oye mi canto. I don’t remember it being a thing in 2006 tbh. But it was big from 2003-2005... I still feel that 2004 was more transitional than 2003. 2003-2004 was still early 2000’s. 2004-2005 was transitional however more mid 2000’s and 2005-2006 was the peak of mid 2000’s culture... Movies like ATL always remind me of the mid 2000’s where as movies like You Got Served remind more of the early 2000’s than mid.

Yeah that's what I meant about Wayne Wonder. His songs prior to no letting go didn't chart so although released music prior to 2003, he only gained mainstream popularity after. I understand where you're coming from with giving credit to original artists. I've argued the same with people here regarding certain genres, but it seems most people here mainly care about mainstream impact a genre has. So I've only recently started focusing more on mainstream than a genres popularity underground or just in the black community but I've been in your position many times.

Caribbean music was def dying down by late 2005 - 2006 but there was still some leftover. I think Sean Paul got his first #1 in 2006. But its certainly not something I associate with 2006. The other genres, especially reggaeton, was surely dead in mainstream in 2006+.

So I think we just disagree mainly on the timeline of things. And that's probably because pinpointing where the mid 2000s start can be difficult. Some people think 2003 was transition while others think 2004 was transitional. I think I'm gonna try to explain my perspective on the mid 2000s in another thread and link it here so that I don't take over this thread any longer.

I have never really had a strong perspective on the division of the early, mid, or late 2000s and for the most part don't participate in these discussions. I only just recently started to feel the later half of 2003 is mid 2000s, up until now I've been calling it a full early 2000s year. However, I have learned a lot from you guys on this site and I think I finally feel comfortable taking part in this discussion. Let me what you think when I post it.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: Captain Jazz on 02/05/20 at 10:48 pm

i don't remember the period being that dark besides the emo aesthetic and possibly just the backlash against the Bush Administration for the Iraq War. I feel like if anything the 2nd half of the 2010s was darker in humor and tone.

Subject: Re: Why were 2005-2007 kinda dark and bleak?

Written By: DisneysRetro on 02/06/20 at 7:10 am


Sean Paul Temperature came out in 06 and have a carribben sound.


Yes which was the only reggae fusion song that charted in 2006 compared to 2003-2005.

Check for new replies or respond here...