It’s nearing that most wonderful time of the year when we get all crazy listing the best films, albums, viral videos, etc. of the past 12 months. We’ll start doing that soon enough; in the meantime, I’m wondering who (or what) you’d name as the best entertainer of the DECADE? Don’t all rush to name not-naked-enough Levi Johnston at once! Think bigger. Is it Harry Potter, without whom there would be no magic? YouTube, without which we would maybe not have a blog? Watching Harry Potter trailers over and over on YouTube? Idol? Any answer is valid, as long as it’s not You or “your mom.”
For now, considering we’ve been in a long-term relationship since 2003, I’m gonna have to name my DVR/life partner as my Entertainer of the Decade. Tina Fey’s a close second, which seems especially fitting because my last sentence was Lemon-level pathetic. What about you?
Photo credit: Depp: Solarpix/PR Photos; Master Castro
Comments (1-15) of 877 Add your comment
Peter Jackson
I was going to say Harry Potter, but you’re right. Peter Jackson, for sure. Especially with Lovely Bones coming out in December.
No it’s definitely Harry Potter. If you didn’t like the movies. You can’t deny how brilliant the books are. Harry Potter pretty much dominated the literary and the film world for 10 years and it’s still going. Peter Jackson is good too, but before the first LOTR film he ws relatively unknown.
Except that Harry Potter is a rip-off of Lord of the Rings and Narnia. And frankly, the Harry Potter movies started copying the style of Jackson’s LOTR movies after they were released. Peter Jackson has been far more influential and inspired far more imitators than Harry Potter. Also, Lord of the Rings is still going too – what with the two Hobbit movies in active production. And let’s not forget that LOTR has been dominating the literary world for decades – long before Potter was published.
HP is nothing like LOTR? Why even do a comparison?
Harry Potter is not a rip-off of LOTR and has nothing to do with Narnia save for the fact that there are kids in both stories. The LOTR movies were much better but in terms of impact (over the last decade), Harry Potter can’t be touched.
Laura…the HP films are nothing like the LOTR films so I don’t know where you got that from. I for one didn’t see one magical school in LOTR or one horse in Harry Potter. ALL fantasy books have similar themes somewhere if you look hard enough…there was no ripping off. Don’t try to talk about something if you don’t have the facts to back it up. I know LOTR has been around for a LONG time but this is about the LAST 10 years. 2000-2010 or whatever. If you consider the HP books and all the midnight releases and theorizing about what was going to happen next and all of the things that happened as a result of the HP books like establishing an actual release date for books, creating a children’s list on the NY times bestseller list, etc. the HP definitely has dominated the literary world for the past 5 years. No one is denying the brilliance that is LOTR, but this is about the last 10 years.
Laura…the first HP movie came out at the same time as the first LOTR. They’re absolutely nothing alike.
harry Potter came out in 1997
Yes, the first Harry Potter movie came out the same year as FOTR. It was also a bad movie. My point was that subsequent Potter movies very strongly imitated Jackson’s brilliant and innovative style. And are you kidding? Of course Potter is a rip-off of LOTR. A young orphan boy who lives a sheltered life with his uncle is suddenly thrown into a magical new world where he is the ONLY one who can ultimately defeat the most horrible villain in the land, who was previously half-killed, now has no body, and is trying to regain his power. And that’s just the basic plot. I could go on and on about other rip-offs (Wormtongue = Wormtail, Nazgul = Dementers, etc.), but I don’t have the space.
Oh, and this young orphan boy is guided by a kindly and wise old wizard, and he only achieves ultimate victory because he is aided by some very great friends. I can keep going…
HARRY POTTER. Even if you can argue that it borrowed a bit from other fantasy and mythology, you can’t deny it had enough ideas and imagination and plot of its own to make it even more entertaining than all that other stuff. Espec the characters. Compared to the HP books, LOTR, Twilight and Narnia=zzzz. I’ve read them all, so I can say that.
A “sheltered life?!” Harry Potter was abused (physically, verbally, psychologically) by his Aunt and Uncle. They neglected him and made him sleep under the stairs like he was a rat! They constantly told him he was worthless and had laughs at his expense. They never spent on dime on him and made him wear his cousin’s hand me down clothes. That’s not sheltered by any meaning of the word. And technically he lived with his Aunt…she was his real blood relative. Dumbledore didn’t really guide Harry in the beginning…Hagrid did. Dumbledore and Harry didn’t really become close at all since Harry didn’t find out anything about him until after he died. Voldemort doesn’t just try to regain his power…he DOES do it. He’s back in full force in 4 of the 7 books. And he’s not the only villain Harry faces. Like I said…there are definitely similarities between all fantasy series I’m not denying that but if you dig deeper than just some physical characteristics…the two stories are absolutely nothing alike. But whatever…this isn’t a HP/LOTR debate. It’s about the entertainer of the decade. I think both LOTR and Harry Potter should be on the list.
Laura, if you’re going to trash Harry Potter for “ripping off” Lord of the Rings, you should equally trash Tolkien for ripping off Arthurian and Celtic lore. All of those stories are based on Norse and Celtic folklore in some way, so of course they’re going to be similar.
And “sheltered”? I’m not sure what you’d say the Dursleys did to Harry, but “sheltered” isn’t the word for it.
Um, if you’re going to say that Harry and Dumbledore are a rip-off of Frodo and Gandalf, you should be honest and say that Frodo and Gandalf are a rip-off of Arthur and Merlin.
Almost EVERY fantasy story shares similarities and elements with other fantasy stories, because they all have common mythological roots. To pick and choose which stories “rip off” others is childish and dishonest.
If you knew how unoriginal Tolkien’s story really was (which doesn’t take away from the quality), you’d be floored.
Semantics, people. Harry Potter definitely led a sheltered life by virtue of the fact that he was locked up in his Uncle’s house (and cupboard) for most of the time, and hence knew nothing of the greater wizard world out there. Harry was also intentionally sheltered and shut away from the world by Dumbledore and Co., who wanted to hide him from Dark Wizards. Yes, Frodo had a happy life in Hobbiton, while Harry was abused by the Dursleys, but both of them still knew nothing of the greater world around them. And Kelsey, yes, Tolkien took many general elements from Arthurian and Celtic lore, but he didn’t blatantly rip-off exact plots and characters as Rowling did (heck, she even took the word “muggle” from a children’s book in the 80s).
“To pick and choose which stories “rip off” others is childish and dishonest.”
Um, I’m not the one calling people names.
But then Peter Jackson did the absolutely awful King Kong remake.
Who cares if she took the word muggle from a children’s book in the 80s. Are you telling me that no one else can come up with that word?! It’s purely coincidence I’m sure and if it’s not then she obviously did her own thing with it. She also got the name Hermione form a Shakespeare play and various of other names from latin terms and other mythology. Is that plagiarism too?
Really? People are arguing about Harry Potter vs. Peter Jackson/Lord of the Rings? Really!?
To Laura, don’t go dissing on HP. I grew up with him AND his great cinematography.
The fact that we are even arguing Harry Potter’s literary standing shows just what the series has done for us. Whether you think it’s a fantastic series or it’s completely unoriginal doesn’t change the fact that everyone knows what it is. Almost everyone can identify most of the basic plot points and have a sufficient amount of understanding about the series to formulate these arguments! Harry Potter has had such a profound effect on the decade whether you think that it’s a rip-off or not.
And Lord of the Rings is a rip off of the Arthurian Legend.
Who cares? I think Wizards in general need to be honored, Dumbledore, Gandalf, Mr. Wizard…
Wow, LOTR and Harry Potter and Narnia have very little in common in my opinion other than they are all fantasy worlds with good vs. evil themes. Peter Jackson didn’t create LOTR either as his movies while brilliant were created to honor the books as closely as possible. The story was Tolkien’s vision and Jackson was just brilliant enough to honor it, keep it and create it masterfully. Harry Potter is also brilliant as Rowling created the vision and continued to see it through to the film. No question both are worthy!
WOW – now I know what it looks like when Sci-fi nerds get into it. Yawn. You people need help. You should turn off your computers, set the book down, go outside and head to the nearest mall and buy a iPhone – TRULY the most entertaining thing of the last decade.
JJ Abrams
JJ Abrams is good. He came up with Lost and reinvented Star Trek, but still entertainer of the decade? Not so much. Maybe for the past 5 years since Lost premiered…but not 10 years.
Definitely Peter Jackson.
Johnny Depp, hands down.
Peter Jackson, absolutely.
Laura, if you’re the same Laura on the HP thread, you’re basically wrong and so many people have called you out on it. For one thing, no one on LOTR led a sheltered life. If you mean Frodo, he wasn’t sheltered and he certainly knew of Gandalf’s wizardry, so your very first point is null void and wrong. As everyone else points out, most fantasy stories have archetypes. What JKR did was to take these great wonderful archetypes and so deftly and masterfully make them her own. Between the books and the movies, Harry Potter is DEFINITELY the entertainer of the decade. I would definitely put LOTR in the TOP TEN, or if you prefer Peter Jackson, fine.
AcaseofGeo: Harry Potter’s a fictional character, nimrod. The question is who’s the entertainer of the decade, not what was the character. But then, you Potterheads have a problem telling fiction from reality, don’t you?
Wow. So this is what happens when someone dares to criticize Harry Potter? All the obsessive Potterheads come out with their claws and try to beat everyone into submitting to their opinion. Scary, really.
JHC: Unnecessary.
Harry Potter is also the name of the series of books. And entertainer doesn’t necessarily mean a person. Did you even read the actual piece, or did you just skip to the comments? “Who (or what) is you Entertainer of the Decade” was the title. The phrase who or what usually means it can be a person or a thing. I think a book is classified as a thing. The author even asks “is it Harry Potter …? Youtube? Idol?” All are things as opposed to people. Maybe you should stop for a second and actually read the article before you jump into the comments and just start name calling.
nicely done, Kristen! i’ve never seen a burn in writing before, but if ever there was one, that was totally it. cheers!
Thanx Kristen and Steph for backup. Anne, I am not attacking someone for criticizing HP. But criticism must be based on fact and really, I couldn’t find any of her criticisms to be accurate, only very fuzzy hazy comparisons. I did then point out that there are archetypes in fantasy that have obviously played into the HP saga. And fine, call me a “nimrod” for saying HP is the entertainer of the decade. I stand by my nomination.
youtube.
YES!
well, second after JKR, but I won’t get into the cat fight ensuing above…
YouTube it is, no question.
I would say Justin Timberlake, Beyonce or J.J. Abrams…. just bought Star Trek last night… what a great film! And I can’t wait for Lost’s final season….
Don’t want to be mean, but that list is hugely suckish! The only half-deserving person on there is abrams but he definitely isn’t my pick.
You need to broaden your mind. This is 10 YEARS we’re talking about here. Who’s had the biggest impact and been on top for TEN YEARS! That completely eliminates Justin and Beyonce. They’ve had their moments, but they’re really only big in the music industry. JJ Abrams HAS had some influence on tv with LOST and on film with Cloverfield, Mission Impossible 3, and Star Trek but he’s not the entertainer of the decade.
Beyonce has been huge for nearly the entire decade, and she’s made some high-profile films including Dreamgirls. Saying J.J. Abrams is more deserving because he went from TV to film is quite a narrow-minded statement. A producer is a producer. Even if he’s dipped his hat in many fields — directing, writing, etc. — it’s not the same as going from being a musician to an actor. Not that Beyonce has been completely successful at that, but you get my point.
Preach, Zach! What’chu talkin’bout Celia?
“Say my name” in 1999, “Bootylicous” in 2001, “Crazy in love” in 2003 and the phenomenal “Single Ladies” last year, Beyoncé totally deserves the title! By the way, Kanye already said quite the same thing so I made my choice. The only contender I may consider is JK Rowling and the Harry Potter franchise.
To answer the other person’s post, you can’t select someone too current or who’s been around for a year. It has to be someone who’s been around between 2000 and 2009 or most of it. I’d like to give it to Beyonce Knowles, who’s managed to have both huge success with Destiny’s Child and as a solo artist along with being an actress the past 10 years. Her last album had 5-6 hit singles, especially Single Ladies! She’s made consistently great music and movies.
Justin Timberlake? Dude, crack is whack!
JT all the way.
Justin Timberlake is an excellent choice for many reasons: he was apart of NSYNC when they sold over 2 million albums in a week ( year 2000). He then went solo and won several grammy’s. He’s become a mega producer/writer for tons of other artists including Madonna. He’s hosted and performed SNL twice (where he went on to win emmy’s for the digital shorts). He has a successful clothing line and restaurant. He’s also become an actor, which obivously isnt his strong suit but he has put himself out there. Not to mention, his personal life. He’s dated a slew of celebs and lastly, he’s proven that you can indeed be a child star without turning out crazy!
Support JT! And, thanks Katie, you said it all! JT’s appearances on SNL are some of the most noteworthy they had in the last few years for sure! I never miss an episode he hosts. And, I believe he might have hosted 3 times now. And, please don’t forget Neil Patrick Harris…! Yeah, NPH! Hosting the Oscars and the Tonys, Barney on HIMYM, his seat on the magic board, coming out, guest hosting for Regis and Kelly, Dr. Horrible and the list goes on. So, I support both JT and NPH!
JJ Abrams is a great pick!! Lost should go down as the best TV series of all time after next season’s finale
Kelly Clarkson
Sadly, it can’t be since her last couple of records have taken such a nosedive.
Strangely i tend to love any record with her name on it there something about her music that is different no matter what it is
u are crazyyy fer real..kc is REAL AND RAW best live performer, not over-produced, never ever lip-synced,loves and respects her fans as much as we love and respect her! gotta love kelly! seriously!
I agree with youu!! In ten years, she’s attained the name of the original Idol with flavor, had four albums, and still happens to have an impeccable voice. Go Kellyyy!!!
hse has REAL PIPES! lol down to earth yet one of the best performers and singers of this decade….love her
I agree. Kelly Clarkson has is the defining contestant in a show (AI) that majorly defined a decade.
Agree 100% Kelly Clarkson!!
I completely agree. She is the epitome of the title of the show that started her career an American Idol. Talented beyond belief.
And no one can escape the infectiousness that is Since U Been Gone
Kelly Clarkson gave American Idol it’s first legitimate star, and made the show acceptable. She is the voice of the decade. American Idol wasn’t just a karaoke contest, it was a genuine way to find superstars. And with success of Jennifer Hudson, Carrie Underwood and Chris Daughtry, it solidified American Idol as a staple of pop culture. Kelly you go girl.
…none of this Twilight B.S., please!
hahahah I’m with yah.
no one can SAY twilight cuz twilight just got big LAST YEAR!!! Its no way had a decade.. and will probably not LAST a decade.
JACK WHITE
Good one. He was Uncut’s Man of the Decade!
for sure; Best Rock Band of the Decade – The White Stripes
AGREED!!!
Idol. Biggest show on TV for most of the decade.
…but reality television as a whole should be considered, love it or hate it.
Yes, reality tv as a whole. It exploded this decade and my favorite new pleasure in reality is VH1!
Idol. Yes, which would put Simon Cowell in that list.
I’m surprised no one has said this yet (read through 5 pages of comments), but Jerry Bruckheimer needs to be mentioned. Producing CSI, NCIS (I think), National Treasure movies and a slew of other stuff. His show style defined drama TV for the entire decade.
The internet.
I like this idea a lot–With Hulu, YouTube, blogs, and other fun distractions, it’s the most entertaining thing out there!
That’s true. Most of my entertainment time has shifted from the TV to the computer.
Facebook deserves an “honourable mention”
I agree with this. Within the past decade, the internet has gone from a place to get information to a one stop shop for movies, tv shows, music, and literature. Plus, there’s all of the wonderful internet-specific entertainment like memes, webisodes, niche blogs, social media and Dr. Horrible!
You totally took my answer. I agree!
Throw in my vote for “Internet” as well.
I vote for Internet too, our lifes wouldn’t be the same without it!!
Internet gets my vote too!!
You can add my vote as well. Even though Internet is older than the decade it was this decade that it changed our entertainment focus with YouTube, Facebook, Fancast, Hulu, EW Online, TMZ, IMDB, Netflix online, etc. Internet it is, reading the blog has made this one my favorite answer.
INTERNET!
The internet is too general. Way too general. Boil it down…
1) Hulu
2) YouTube
3) Homestarrunner.com (ok, that lasted all of 3 or 4 years)
Even then, none of those have been relevant the entire decade, though YouTube changed everything.
Too soon to name an “Entertainer of the Decade” because the current decade ends on Dec 31 2010, not Dec 31, 2009!
No, that’s not true.
Oh, stuff it. Yes, “technically.” But nobody cares about Dec 31 2010.
If we’re talking about the first decade of the 21st century, that would be 2001-2010. If we’re talking about the “aughts”, i.e. the decade following the Nineties, then it’s 2000-2009.
Not in this culture, 60’s ended in 69, etc.
Technically true, but I still think of the decade as ending with that new “1″ digit.
It depends. True that the 20th century ended on Dec 31, 2000 but the century of the 1900s ended on December 31, 1999. If you are describing the 201st decade then you are correct, it ends on December 31, 2010. If it is about the first decade of the 2000s, then EW is right. A decade can be any ten year span.
This is exactly right. A decade just means ten, so the aughts end Dec. 31, 2009.
Yeah, exactly. The first century of this era was 1 AD – 100 AD, not 0 AD – 99 AD. But it’s much less confusing and more convenient to separate the decades by starting it with a multiple of 10 (1971-1980 doesn’t look as nice as 1970-1979, for example).
Yeah, there were these sorts of arguments around Dec. 31, 1999 too. You can say “technically” all you want–people like nice round numbers.
The decade ends on Dec. 31, 2009. Just like the nineties ended on Dec. 31, 1999.
THANK YOU!
Oh who cared?!? Seriously, if somebody “new” pops up next year then they wouldn’t qualify because they have only been around for one year and not a decade. And anyone who would qualify next year will certainly qualify now! Get off your highhorse and just have fun with it.
Pixar
I second Pixar!
Yes! If only for the genius that is “Boundin’”.
Of course, Pixar !! Every movie they released in the 2000s (and even before) were the highlights of the year when they were released.
Amazing pick!!! I third it!!! Gak! How did I not think of that!!!
I would totally say Pixar, because their movies of thise decade have been spectacular, but I almost feel like ruling them out because two of their biggest masterpieces, Toy Story and Toy Story 2, were of the ’90s. But with Up, Finding Nemo, WALL-E, The Incredibles, Monsters Inc., Rataouille, and all the shorts of this decade, I would hardly object.
Ah, but Toy Story 2 came out in 2000, did it not?
In any case, I would agree with the case for Pixar, since I think most of America thinks of Pixar as some movie actor or music artist. “Oh, cool, the new Pixar movie trailer” as an example.
I was about to type why I thought Johnny Depp should receive the honors, then Pixar dawned on me, making me hold the Backspace key. Glad somebody else beat me to it!
Michael C. Hall for best actor from a television series.
Also, I second the ban on anything Twilight related!
Easy, Pixar Animation
J.K. Rowling and the entire Harry Potter gang have by far been the greatest entertainers of the decade. I read the first book a little before the decade began (when Harry and I were both 11) and look forward to seeing the final movies soon after the decade ends.
Agreed. (Nice name, btw) I totally second JK Rowling and Harry Potter. Between the books and movies, the franchise as a whole has made a major impact on the decade. LOTR? Hmmm. I haven’t thought of those movies since the early 2000’s – no way they even make my top ten. But Survivor is my second choice for ushering in the new age of reality TV. Love it or hate it – think of the ramifications of Survivor…copycat shows all the way to the Kardashians to American Idol to the Bachelor. Even Jon and Kate +8. (Ick. Never mind. I take it back. Maybe we should punish and demote Survivor for opening up that cursed part of the 2000’s…)
No, Ash, don’t be hard on Survivor because of J.K.+8. That is an entirely different format of “reality” show. Survivor really started the whole process of eliminating “characters” one by one, a formula that you correctly alluded to that has been copied over and over. My only gripe with Survivor (and this is a SMALL gripe cuz I am a HUGE fan) is that it is all pre-taped in advance so the editing is skewed for specific or red-herring outcomes that have no input from the fan base toward who wins.
Seconded!
HBO’s The Wire!
Definitely!!! At least Best Overlooked Show!!
YES!!
The iPod. It was an iPod decade without a doubt.
have to agree even tho i dont like apple/mac. if it wasn’t for the ipod, we’d all still be listening to music on cd players as opposed to mp3 players.
agreed. the iPod & the iPhone.
iPod ALL the way. My music listening has changed completely since the iPod came out way back in 2001. I’d also add iTunes. So..iPod/iTunes for me!
Couldn’t agree more. I bought my first iPod in 2004, and I’ve used it every day since. Nothing has entertained me more and made e.g. the commute more enjoyable than the iPod.
I think the iPod is great but it didn’t get really big till like the end of 03 beginning of 04, which is already 1/3 of the way into the decade, I think entertainer of the decade should be something that entertained us for the entire 10 years…