During like late 2004-2005 the 90s came back breifly,

-Nightmare before Xmas Shirts
-Power Rangers Shirts
-VH1 I love the 90s
- 90s games being offered on Xbox 360

It was very brief, but it did happen

Ironic, considering 2004/2005 was the first school year that the last of the leftover 90s trends in the early 2000s had been eradicated for good.

Ironic, considering 2004/2005 was the first school year that the last of the leftover 90s trends in the early 2000s had been eradicated for good.

Yeah I was in highschool at the time, but it def did happen, there was even 90s parties going on as well,
it just wasnt as in your face as like  Iggys fancy, or al these 90s movies being made,  it was mostly 80s partys
and 80s nostalgia/fashion taking over  (but a SMALL amount of 90s retroness was there)

The 90's came back in the 2004-2005 school year?  ::) ???

Like someone else already mentioned, late 90's influences and early 2000's culture were totally dead like a rock by then.

In 2004 and 2005 the 90's had already left. I don't know how there could of been a resurgence of the 90's in 2004 when 2003 was the previous year.

I don't remember it.

And the '90s were a recent memory at that time, with certain things still around.  Friends was still on the air until 2004.  You really can't bring back something that never left.  I do remember '80s nostalgia being somewhat popular in the '00s but it wasn't to the extent that '90s nostalgia is here this decade.

And the '90s were a recent memory at that time, with certain things still around.  Friends was still on the air until 2004.  You really can't bring back something that never left.  I do remember '80s nostalgia being somewhat popular in the '00s but it wasn't to the extent that '90s nostalgia is here this decade.


I disagree, I think 80s nostalgia in the 00s was more prominent than 90s nostalgia is this decade.  Certain 2000s comedies like Dodgeball and Zoolander, plus a lot of the pop punk released during the decade, had very apparent cues to the 1980s, and even bands like Bon Jovi and U2 became huge again as well.  By contrast, people just think "the 90s are back!" this decade because of all the internet junk you see, but the influence of the 90s has hardly left a dent in other forms of popular media in the 2010s, at least so far.  If the 90s were really back, then there'd be some sort of grunge revival that isn't just the cross-eyed smiley face Nirvana shirts, bowl cuts, Rachels, curtained hair, and long hair on guys would be relatively common; a Michael Bay live action film adaptation of Pokémon, and top 40 hits that are more diverse than just cookie cutter EDM and trap.  To be honest, it seems as though nostalgia this decade has mostly concentrated around Bush '41-era fads, such as the new TMNT cartoon and live action film, Fuller House, the upcoming revival of Twin Peaks, eraser haircuts being popular in the African American community again, and a movie about N.W.A.  Nostalgia for the rest of the 90s is currently about as strong as nostalgia for the early 2000s - talked about, but not significantly influential to popular culture.

I disagree, I think 80s nostalgia in the 00s was more prominent than 90s nostalgia is this decade.  Certain 2000s comedies like Dodgeball and Zoolander, plus a lot of the pop punk released during the decade, had very apparent cues to the 1980s, and even bands like Bon Jovi and U2 became huge again as well.  By contrast, people just think "the 90s are back!" this decade because of all the internet junk you see, but the influence of the 90s has hardly left a dent in other forms of popular media in the 2010s, at least so far.  If the 90s were really back, then there'd be some sort of grunge revival that isn't just the cross-eyed smiley face Nirvana shirts, bowl cuts, Rachels, curtained hair, and long hair on guys would be relatively common; a Michael Bay live action film adaptation of Pokémon, and top 40 hits that are more diverse than just cookie cutter EDM and trap.  To be honest, it seems as though nostalgia this decade has mostly concentrated around Bush '41-era fads, such as the new TMNT cartoon and live action film, Fuller House, the upcoming revival of Twin Peaks, eraser haircuts being popular in the African American community again, and a movie about N.W.A.  Nostalgia for the rest of the 90s is currently about as strong as nostalgia for the early 2000s - talked about, but not significantly influential to popular culture.


It's funny you mention Pop Punk because that's actually something that did start in the 80's. As early as 1979-1981 that sound came around. Bands like The Freeze, Screeching Weasel, Dag Nasty, The Asexuals, Bad Religion and Anti had that exact sound which would later become mainstream in 1994 with Green Day and The Offspring. Even bands like The Buzzcocks, Ramones (especially songs like "You Look Like You're Sick" or "The KKK Took My Baby Away" on their 1981 album Pleasant Dreams) and The Dickies were pretty close to that sound. So, from a certain point, it's just an 80's thing that got really big in the 90's. Sorta like Grunge, that is also an 80's thing that started around 1984 and even got it's first taste of mainstream success in 1988.

It's funny you mention Pop Punk because that's actually something that did start in the 80's. As early as 1979-1981 that sound came around. Bands like The Freeze, Screeching Weasel, Dag Nasty, The Asexuals, Bad Religion and Anti had that exact sound which would later become mainstream in 1994 with Green Day and The Offspring. Even bands like The Buzzcocks, Ramones (especially songs like "You Look Like You're Sick" or "The KKK Took My Baby Away" on their 1981 album Pleasant Dreams) and The Dickies were pretty close to that sound. So, from a certain point, it's just an 80's thing that got really big in the 90's. Sorta like Grunge, that is also an 80's thing that started around 1984 and even got it's first taste of mainstream success in 1988.


None of the bands you listed from the turn of the 80s achieved mainstream success, they were signed to independent labels and didn't seek fame and fortune like the arena rock bands that were growing in popularity.  Bad Religion didn't become well-known outside of the punk community until they signed with Atlantic and released Stranger Than Fiction in 1994, which contained the sardonic but still relatively accessible 21st Century (Digital Boy).  Frankly, the bands you listed hardly count as "pop punk" at all; the closest we got to that term before 1994 was with new wave acts like Pat Benatar and the Go-Go's, although you could make a semi-argument for The Clash, who were signed to a major label and released chart-topping radio-friendly songs like Train in Vain, Rock the Casbah, and Should I Stay or Should I Go?.

As for 80s influences in pop punk, I think mainly of songs like Summer of '69, Jessie's Girl, and Heaven Is a Place on Earth as having left the most direct influence, with synthpop and new wave bands like Depeche Mode, Simple Minds, OMD, and Tears for Fears as having made The Killers, Franz Ferdinand, and U2's comeback possible during the 2000s.  2000s pop punk was very pop; punk enthusiasts were appalled enough when bands like Green Day, The Offspring, and Bad Religion signed to major labels in the mid-90s, but groups following in the path of blink-182 had cleaned up the style so much that even the original themes of punk were no longer really apparent.

None of the bands you listed from the turn of the 80s achieved mainstream success, they were signed to independent labels and didn't seek fame and fortune like the arena rock bands that were growing in popularity.  Bad Religion didn't become well-known outside of the punk community until they signed with Atlantic and released Stranger Than Fiction in 1994, which contained the sardonic but still relatively accessible 21st Century (Digital Boy).  Frankly, the bands you listed hardly count as "pop punk" at all; the closest we got to that term before 1994 was with new wave acts like Pat Benatar and the Go-Go's, although you could make a semi-argument for The Clash, who were signed to a major label and released chart-topping radio-friendly songs like Train in Vain, Rock the Casbah, and Should I Stay or Should I Go?.

As for 80s influences in pop punk, I think mainly of songs like Summer of '69, Jessie's Girl, and Heaven Is a Place on Earth as having left the most direct influence, with synthpop and new wave bands like Depeche Mode, Simple Minds, OMD, and Tears for Fears as having made The Killers, Franz Ferdinand, and U2's comeback possible during the 2000s.  2000s pop punk was very pop; punk enthusiasts were appalled enough when bands like Green Day, The Offspring, and Bad Religion signed to major labels in the mid-90s, but groups following in the path of blink-182 had cleaned up the style so much that even the original themes of punk were no longer really apparent.


You don't think I know that? I am pretty sure I know quite a bit about the 80's Punk scene to know they didn't want to be big arena acts. They didn't achieve mainstream success but that wasn't my point. My point was the sound was nothing new in 1994. Trust me, I was a part of the 90's Punk Rock scene. I got into Punk when Green Day released Dookie and I was actually there when blink-182 first released enema. I started going to shows in 1996 at 14 and I even talked to a lot of older guys back in the day who knew much more about the 80's scene than I did, I know what I'm talking about. Listen to stuff like this:

1981
HyYUOr0dSp4

1982:
rmFZqbh7TaU

1983:
STz27xJk5mU

1984:
ZW5TnZQeIbs

1985:
ku5Q6Gq6m_4

1986:
H0_vEAwEEW8

1987:
ZEdMKPztNgo

1988:
_itiXOeEnzw

1989:
vi-8gVafA7k

Anyone into Punk will tell you that Green Day and Offspring shouldn't get the credit for creating the sound because all these bands had that sound before Green Day did. And Green Day even debuted in 1989 with their first EP, 1,000 Hours. They even have bootleg recordings from way back in 1987/1988 and it sounds all sounds pretty Pop Punk to me. I said nothing about Pop Punk being mainstream so you bringing that up is a moot and redundant point when, in my original post, I even said "it's an 80's thing that got mainstream in 1994." And that term did not pop out of nowhere in 1994 because Timmy Yo, writer of Maximum Rock 'n Roll, used the term to dismiss Green Day out of the Gilman scene for being too "Punk Pop." Speaking of Gilman, most people who were into Punk will tell to that the Gilman 924 scene is the start of the Pop Punk that got big in 1994.

If you're talking about 2000-2003 Pop Punk then, no, it was already very Pop by time 1997/1998 rolled around. If you mean the stuff that came out after 2004 like Fall Out Boy, Panic at the Disco and Paramore then yeah, that is the reason Warped 2005 was the last time I ever went to the Warped Tour. But those were a whole new crop of bands I wasn't interested in. I don't know where you're getting that whole "punk enthusiasts were appalled enough when bands like Green Day, The Offspring, and Bad Religion signed to major labels in the mid-90s, but groups following in the path of blink-182 had cleaned up the style so much that even the original themes of punk were no longer really apparent." because they didn't care either way. Green Day and blink-182 were the same band as far as they were concerned. Most of them even hated Fat Wreck and Epitaph bands. The only thing that mattered to them was that the bands they listened to were small, underground bands with a small followings. Pop music is Pop music and they still hated Green Day when blink-182 got big in 1999 with Enema of the State.

You don't think I know that? I am pretty sure I know quite a bit about the 80's Punk scene to know they didn't want to be big arena acts. They didn't achieve mainstream success but that wasn't my point. My point was the sound was nothing new in 1994. Trust me, I was a part of the 90's Punk Rock scene. I got into Punk when Green Day released Dookie and I was actually there when blink-182 first released enema. I started going to shows in 1996 at 14 and I even talked to a lot of older guys back in the day who knew much more about the 80's scene than I did, I know what I'm talking about.

I figured you were a punk fan based on your signature and avatar, but I was bringing up that point because it shows the huge contrast in punk's political status during the 80s versus the mid-90s and beyond. Considering punk's origins were in direct protest against the major corporations who controlled the music industry.  I'm sorry this is just restating the obvious for you, but my point was really more focused on the public image of punk, especially as it related to other cultural trends and not just the sound, though I do think there are key differences between 80s punk and mid-90s pop punk. More on that soon.

Anyone into Punk will tell you that Green Day and Offspring shouldn't get the credit for creating the sound because all these bands had that sound before Green Day did. And Green Day even debuted in 1989 with their first EP, 1,000 Hours. They even have bootleg recordings from way back in 1987/1988 and it sounds all sounds pretty Pop Punk to me. I said nothing about Pop Punk being mainstream so you bringing that up is a moot and redundant point when, in my original post, I even said "it's an 80's thing that got mainstream in 1994." And that term did not pop out of nowhere in 1994 because Timmy Yo, writer of Maximum Rock 'n Roll, used the term to dismiss Green Day out of the Gilman scene for being too "Punk Pop." Speaking of Gilman, most people who were into Punk will tell to that the Gilman 924 scene is the start of the Pop Punk that got big in 1994.

Honestly, I don't think the songs you posted resemble the major label pop punk bands of the mid-late 90s. While I can understand the structural and melodic cues the later bands took from their predecessors, the production values are conspicuously different between the two movements. All of the 80s songs you linked to have much cruder and coarser vocal delivery, as well as garagier, rawer instrumentation. Any studio executives at Columbia or Atlantic Recorda would take one listen to these tracks and complain that they sound too "unpolished," too "amateur," and too "inaccessible." They sound much more like the type of music The Ramones were releasing all the way back to Blitzkreig Bop - simple, short, and melodic, but also scroungy and abrasive.

Since you mentioned Green Day, I think that the influence of being signed to a major label is very obvious when you compare the group's pre-Reprise work to their Reprise catalogue. Case in point, Welcome to Paradise, which was originally from Kerplunk but then got re-recorded for Dookie to be released as the album's second single. Structurally and melodically, the two versions are exactly the same, but the Kerplunk recording has rougher and edgier guitars and is played much faster. The Dookie edition, on the other hand, has a very clean sound, with polished mastering and bassier instrumental hooks, as well as clearer vocal delivery.

If you're talking about 2000-2003 Pop Punk then, no, it was already very Pop by time 1997/1998 rolled around. If you mean the stuff that came out after 2004 like Fall Out Boy, Panic at the Disco and Paramore then yeah, that is the reason Warped 2005 was the last time I ever went to the Warped Tour. But those were a whole new crop of bands I wasn't interested in. I don't know where you're getting that whole "punk enthusiasts were appalled enough when bands like Green Day, The Offspring, and Bad Religion signed to major labels in the mid-90s, but groups following in the path of blink-182 had cleaned up the style so much that even the original themes of punk were no longer really apparent." because they didn't care either way. Green Day and blink-182 were the same band as far as they were concerned. Most of them even hated Fat Wreck and Epitaph bands. The only thing that mattered to them was that the bands they listened to were small, underground bands with a small followings. Pop music is Pop music and they still hated Green Day when blink-182 got big in 1999 with Enema of the State.


Perhaps "punk purist" is a more accurate title - the backlash against Dookie and Stranger Than Fiction was definitely tame compared to The Young and the Hopeless, Enema of the State, and From Under the Cork Tree, but I'm pretty sure there was at least a somewhat sizable portion of the punk community that detested Bad Religion, Green Day, and The Offspring's decision to sign to major labels. Even if the content of their music was not actually that different besides the more polished production, the mere fact that they were now part of Atlantic, Reprise, and Columbia respectively meant they were okay with giving the ultra-wealthy studio executives the lion's share of profits from their album sales,, a political status that perverts the very essence of punk in the first place.

Weird to think how there could be a 90's ressurgence when the 90's were still seen as recent back then, maybe if it were 2006 or 2007 I would understand a little more but 2004 was WAY too early

Weird to think how there could be a 90's ressurgence when the 90's were still seen as recent back then, maybe if it were 2006 or 2007 I would understand a little more but 2004 was WAY too early


Yeah 2004 still had some '90s fads still relevant, such as the show "Friends."  You can't have a resurgence of something that never left.

So during the 2004-05 school year, they tried to revive the 90s? I know that I've been nostalgic over the 2000s since 2013, but that seems kinda early back then.

I figured you were a punk fan based on your signature and avatar, but I was bringing up that point because it shows the huge contrast in punk's political status during the 80s versus the mid-90s and beyond. Considering punk's origins were in direct protest against the major corporations who controlled the music industry.  I'm sorry this is just restating the obvious for you, but my point was really more focused on the public image of punk, especially as it related to other cultural trends and not just the sound, though I do think there are key differences between 80s punk and mid-90s pop punk. More on that soon.

Honestly, I don't think the songs you posted resemble the major label pop punk bands of the mid-late 90s. While I can understand the structural and melodic cues the later bands took from their predecessors, the production values are conspicuously different between the two movements. All of the 80s songs you linked to have much cruder and coarser vocal delivery, as well as garagier, rawer instrumentation. Any studio executives at Columbia or Atlantic Recorda would take one listen to these tracks and complain that they sound too "unpolished," too "amateur," and too "inaccessible." They sound much more like the type of music The Ramones were releasing all the way back to Blitzkreig Bop - simple, short, and melodic, but also scroungy and abrasive.

Since you mentioned Green Day, I think that the influence of being signed to a major label is very obvious when you compare the group's pre-Reprise work to their Reprise catalogue. Case in point, Welcome to Paradise, which was originally from Kerplunk but then got re-recorded for Dookie to be released as the album's second single. Structurally and melodically, the two versions are exactly the same, but the Kerplunk recording has rougher and edgier guitars and is played much faster. The Dookie edition, on the other hand, has a very clean sound, with polished mastering and bassier instrumental hooks, as well as clearer vocal delivery.

Perhaps "punk purist" is a more accurate title - the backlash against Dookie and Stranger Than Fiction was definitely tame compared to The Younnr and the Hopeless, Enema of the State, and From Under the Cork Tree, but I'm pretty sure there was at least a somewhat sizable portion of the punk community that detested Bad Religion, Green Day, and The Offspring's decision to sign to major labels. Even if the content of their music was not actually that different besides the more polished production, the mere fact that they were now part of Atlantic, Reprise, and Columbia respectively meant they were okay with giving the ultra-wealthy studio executives the lion's share of profits from their album sales,, a political status that perverts the very essence of punk in the first place.


Punks origins lie with the Ramones and they wanted to be a big band. They even wrote a song called "We Want the Airwaves". Total honesty from those guys. There are differences, yeah sure, but like you stated with the Kerplunk and Dookie example, it's the same stuff with different production. Personally, I think the first truly polished Punk albums were probably Bad Religion's Suffer and both Descendent's Enjoy and ALL records. It isn't that different from the mid-90's up to early 00's stuff. It's definitely what those bands were listening to. Even Green Day and blink-182 cite those bands as their influences. Plus, I don't consider The Descendents nor Bad Religion's mid-late 80's output to be amateurish and unpolished. Those bands were already 6/7 years old by time they released their polished records. Politically, remember that Gang Green (signed to Roadrunner records in 1987) and Husker Du (signed to Warner in 1985) all tried to get major success. The roots of the 90's Punk scene were there in the 80's. Soundwise by 1983 it was there and everything else (politics etc.) by 1985-1988. Alternative music was bound to make a breakthrough sometime if you really look at what was happening from 1985-1988 (you know, Thrash Metal, Grunge and Punk first being signed to major labels during this time span). And I am just talking about the 80's scene. Don't forget; The Clash and Pistols were signed to Majors as well and they were huge bands in the 70's. The Ramones didn't really have the luck, though. They wanted to be big but they just couldn't break through. Truthfully, if you really think about it, Punk had already sold out by 1977/1978 and a lot of really old guys will say it died by 1977-1982 (listen to Crass' song Punk is Dead. Released in 1978).  I do agree that those songs are more like The Ramones and closer to pure punk but the style's still there. Green Day and the Offspring just took whatever those bands were doing and polished it up. That's all, really.  Listen to this Bad Religion song from 1988. It sounds pretty professional and if they had released this in 1994, it might of been a hit.

Alright, this is a huge misconception and I don't blame you for thinking this but I'm gonna give you an idea of what the scene was actually like from 1996-2005 (when I was involved). The Punk purists hated those bands regardless of their sound. A major label was enough for people to hate you and even Fat Wreck/Epitaph were majors in their eyes. To some, Punk died in 1986 and nothing afterwards was good. Or, they all listened to bands like Charles Bronson (who even have a song called "I Can't Be Friends With You Because You Like Epitaph" read the lyrics for some context on how Punk Purists saw Epi-Fat bands. That song is also from 1997 just in case you're wondering), Spazz, Capitalist Casualties and other rough Power-Violence, Anarcho and Crust bands plus a bunch of 80's bands. I also liked these bands but I was more open to the poppy stuff, too. Cork Tree is from a different era than Enema and Young and Hopeless (Enema ane Hopeless are from the 1994-2004 wave, Cork Tree is from the 2005-now wave) and the backlash wasn't the same because most people involved in the 90's scene moved on around 2003-2005. Yes, there was a lot of backlash towards late 90's/early 00's albums like Enema of the State, Act Your Age, Slowly Going The Way of the Buffalo, Kings of Pop, So Long and Thanks For the Shoes, Sticks and Stones etc. but the backlash was just an ongoing thing. People hated Dookie, Smash, Stranger than Fiction, Punk in Drublic, Out Come the Wolves more than anything. They were the first major label albums; "the albums that ruined Punk." When Enema came out, it wasn't this huge thing where backlash was going right, left and center, it was just another Dookie to Punk purists. When Sum 41 came out, they were the "Nofx that wasn't afraid to admit they just wanted your money." These are actual quotes that had been said to me 14/15 years ago. Me, personally, liked it all. Good music is good music and all that stuff was cool with me. It had the attitude and sound I liked.  2002 is the last full year of a lot of things. The scene I was a part of being one of them. 2003 and 2004 were transitions into the next wave which was Fall Out Boy, Panic at the Disco, All Time Low and Paramore. I had a personal backlash against those bands because they ruined what I liked about my scene. Also, the biggest backlash since Dookie was probably American Idiot. That album had huge, huge backlash. Like you wouldn't believe. It's like a cycle: Gilman 924 kids hated Dookie with a passion and the scene I was into hated American Idiot with a passion. I know it sounds stupid and most might not understand what it was like but when American Idiot came out I was pretty pissed off because Green Day were one of my all time favorite bands. They used to be one of the coolest bands ever and then they were wearing make-up, skinny jeans and pretending to be political trying to appeal to teenage girls. It was not the same band I spent my teen years listening to.

"-Nightmare before Xmas Shirts"
That was always famous

"-Power Rangers Shirts"
Wasn't there a contemporary series running at the time.

"-VH1 I love the 90s"
They made I love the New Millennium in 2008

"- 90s games being offered on Xbox 360"
Possibly.

I don't think 90s throwbacks were substantial in the 00s. The decade had still just ended and, at the time, ringing in 90s nostalgia in any way shape or form was as easy bringing the 00s back now. It isn't.

Even the decade throwback CDs they used to advertise in TV in the 00s like Timelife only featured songs from the 50s-80s. Even then I used to wonder why they always stopped at the 80s and figured people just didn't care enough about the 90s to warrant a throwback CD dedicated to it. 

"-Nightmare before Xmas Shirts"
That was always famous

"-Power Rangers Shirts"
Wasn't there a contemporary series running at the time.

"-VH1 I love the 90s"
They made I love the New Millennium in 2008

"- 90s games being offered on Xbox 360"
Possibly.

I don't think 90s throwbacks were substantial in the 00s. The decade had still just ended and, at the time, ringing in 90s nostalgia in any way shape or form was as easy bringing the 00s back now. It isn't.

Even the decade throwback CDs they used to advertise in TV in the 00s like Timelife only featured songs from the 50s-80s. Even then I used to wonder why they always stopped at the 80s and figured people just didn't care enough about the 90s to warrant a throwback CD dedicated to it.

Nightmare before Christmas and Power Ranger/80's-90's pop culture shirts were extremely popular with the Hot Topic crowd. Most 90's games like Sonic The Hedgehog, Toe jam and Earl, etc. were available due to Xbox Live & Gametap launching. Vh1 was doing the I love the 90's because they already did the 80's twice and 70's up to that point. it was just trying to cash in on the original concept.  I wouldn't really call that too much of a 90's revival

the engine was started but the car wasn't moving yet.