Discuss

20 Responses to “Game of Thrones 1995”

  1. welcomeabored says:

    ‘I want it all, and I want it now.’

    If they’re singing about Peter Dinklage… yes, please, and don’t bother to wrap him, I’ll be in a hurry.

  2. Supernumerary says:

    I can’t tell if this makes me want to rewatch Xena or Highlander more.

  3. Ok, but now where’s Buffy and Babylon 5 done 2010s-style?

  4. wrybread says:

    Love it. I remember when the 80s were in progress we all thought it had no discernable style. Looking back now, I can’t imagine how we didn’t notice all that 80′s ness. I’ve been wondering what the 90s will look like when we get far enough away, and lo and behold its crappy VCR video and post-heyday Queen. Who knew?

  5. EggyToast says:

     Interestingly, it appears that the general consensus is that the first 3 years of the 90s are grouped into the 80s as far as style, music, and movies go. Loud colors, big clothes, neon — they did not end at the convenient 1990 mark, but continued on for years. One of the shows that I consider coming at the tail end of the 80s, Saved By The Bell, is essentially a 90s TV show. And I always group Groundhog Day into 80s movies, even though it came out in ’93.

    Yet “Nevermind” came out in ’91 and grunge is entirely a 90s phenomenon. It shifted into the poorly titled “alternative” and, if anything,  the end of the 90s is where we start to move into digital media. No more title card overlays or poorly rendered green screen. The X-Files matures. Star Trek TNG is finished. Buffy is being broadcast and people are no longer dressing like the 80s OR like lumberjacks.

    If anything, the late 90s and aughts are generally style-less, in my opinion. In a lot of ways, much of what happened is now just considered a precursor of what we have now, rather than a distinct style. Movies are “more” but not fundamentally different. The CGI is better. Music is being made to sound like the 80s by people who didn’t grow up listening to 80s music. But the shift to digital has removed a lot of the obvious ways we date previous decades, and the now-ubiquitous Internet has smoothed over a lot of the local style bubbles as everyone can talk to everyone else.

    You can still spot a Brooklyn Hipster in a lineup, but it’s not because they’re creating a style — it’s because they’re intentionally trying to stand out. Similarly, while there are differences in The Hobbit compared to the LOTR movies, could you realistically tell that they came out a decade apart?

    • ClintonD says:

      Yeah, this is pretty much my exact same thought about what was the 90s. The early part was a continuation of the 80s. “Nevermind”-onward was true 90s, and the late 90s was a prelude to trends in the 2000s. I’d have to say that Spice Girls were the beginning of the end for the “True 90s”. I think there are some really good parts of the “true 90s” that haven’t been nostalgized yet, so they go for the cheesier parts of the decade.

      • madopal says:

        It’s hard for me to think of Nevermind as pure 90s, considering that you had The Cure, The Pixies, New Order, and Dead Kennedys all being very prolific thru the 80s.  It was just the culmination of the 80s alternative scene that had reached a boil over the past 5-10 years.

        I think the problem is that we think of most decades being associated with their biggest phenomenon.  So you’ve got psychedelic rock for the 60s, stadium rock for the 70s, synth for the 80s, grunge for the 90s…but none of those are true of the decade as a whole at all.  They’re all parts of a continuum that even if it was a spike, it was a brief one.  So, for example, people rarely think of “I Saw Her Standing There” by The Beatles with Hendrix’ “Purple Haze”, despite both being in the 60s.  yet Pixies’ “Where Is My Mind” and Taylor Dayne’s “Tell It to My Heart” were the *same year*.

        So the overlap definitely confounds our ideas of eras, especially when we try and categorize anything by decade.  Easier to just stick to a genre/aesthetic and not get hung up on the time period lining up with an even decade.

    • JohnnyReason says:

       Actually, if I recall correctly, the 80s were marked by tighter jeans and sleeker clothes (and loud colors), while the ridiculous baggy clothes came around in the 1990s. MC Hammer was like 1992.

    • wrybread says:

      I was with you until you called the aughts style-less. That’s how it always looks when you’re too close to it. It’ll be another 10 years at least until we can really see what those years looked like, but all that early webpage design, internet schemes, Bush and other corporate shinanigans, birth of social media, and who knows what else will probably seem very “aught” someday.

      Just the fact that every other decade has a clear style that was imperceptible at the time should tell us that.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      …it appears that the general consensus is that the first 3 years of the 90s are grouped into the 80s…

      Is there a decade for which that’s not true?  1963 was still the era of cat glasses and poodle skirts.

    • Dlo Burns says:

      Oh there’s a bunch of 00′s things that won’t fly today, such as emo-ism, garish Fast & Furious tuner style cars, girls getting that Andy Warhol type haircut with the darkened mullet area, Chris Angel style ‘dudes wearing every leather/bone voodoo jewelry they can possibly fit on their body’, cartoonishly ‘faded’ jeans, eurobeat music, TRUCKER HATS, Jelly bracelets, arm warmers, this entire list http://www.buzzfeed.com/angelameiquan/this-falls-hottest-trends-from-hot-topic , etc.

      Another change from the 90′s to 00′s was that dudes stopped wearing (new) jerseys because all the leagues changed them and they suck.

  6. JohnnyReason says:

    Noooo!

    The U.S.’s exponentially decreasing retro gap is in danger of achieving parity with real-time historical events early in the next century, creating what leading retro experts call a “futurified recursion loop,” or “retro-present warp,” in the world of American pop-cultural kitsch appreciation. Such a warp, Williams said, was never a danger in the past due to the longtime, standard two-decade-minimum retro waiting period. “However, the mid-’80s deregulation of retro under the Reagan Administration eliminated that safeguard,” he explained, “leaving us to face the threat of retro-ironic appreciation being applied to present or even future events.”

    “We are talking about a potentially devastating crisis situation in which our society will express nostalgia for events which have yet to occur,” Williams told reporters.

    The National Retro Clock currently stands at 1990, an alarming 74 percent closer to the present than 10 years ago, when it stood at 1969.

    • wrybread says:

      Whoa, that’s effin good. You not only win the thread, but I’m going to go ahead and award the entire week to you. Retroactively, of course.

  7. flickerKuu says:

    Man how many times did you watch this? It’s horrible quality. I can see all the spots where you paused it to fap to dragons.

Leave a Reply