I hate being harsh on the L.A. Times' "Underrated/Overrated" feature (once found in Thursday's "The Guide," now found in Sunday's Calendar section), mostly because it gave a shout out last year to the Great Los Angeles Walk.
Nonetheless, today's "underrated" column -- on The '00s -- completely missed the mark. Here's what they wrote about the decade we're almost done with:
We think we've been spared such pop culture missteps as the fashion sense of the 1980s or the angst and irony of the 1990s, so let's hope the decade continues its relatively inoffensive, hard-to-categorize run for one more year. The 2000s: They're not bad.
Sorry, guys, you couldn't be more wrong. This was the decade that pop culture finally got mind-numbingly insipid. The goofy fashion of the 1980s or the angst of the 1990s has nothing on the 2000s: Reality TV, D-list celebrity, the look-at-me culture of Internet video and blogging (hey, I'm just as guilty of this inspidness as anyone!) There's plenty that the 2000s will be remembered for -- I'd argue that it will be easy to categorize the decade when all is said and done.
The only real question is what the 00s will be called -- it's a tad odd that we've just got one more year left of this decade, and there's still no consensus on what we should call it. The Aughts? The double-Os? The 2000s? Someone, I'm sure, it putting together the sequel to "I Love the 80s" and "I Love the 90s," and still isn't quite sure what to name their show.