While some of the garments were totally insane, this little patterned number is actually wearable.

And for a beachy, summery, easy look, it doesn't get much better than this.

Team No Pants is winning. You realize that, right?

Bright, fun, youthful.

May induce migraines.

'Sup, Mr. Gratuitous Objectification.

This dress is a little off, but also kind of sweet — it's some kooky girl's fantasy prom dress, rest assured.

Smack as in smack your lips? Or smack as in, "You've gotta be on smack if you think this passes as a dress"?

'Sup, Mr. Scissors.

I could see one of those Young Hollywood types rocking this at a party.

'Sup, Mr. I'm Shy About My Package.

Teen dream? Or sensory overload?

The weird thing about this collection is that the casual stuff is all street stencils and low-budget looking…

…And then there are some really elegant pieces that aren't a total joke.

'Sup, Mr. Wedgie.

'Sup, Mr. Strategically-Placed Sunglasses.

Is this really what the world needs right now? I don't think so.

On one hand, there's an unapologetic zest for zaniness and party-never-stops energy in this. On the other hand, for the love of Miami Vice! This is terrifying!

There's been a lot of electric blue on the runways, and I like it.

So Pamela Anderson and Richie Rich came out at the end of the show…

…And did whatever it is that you want to call this…

…And that's all she wrote.

[Images via Getty.]

New York Times writer Guy Trebay talks to Laura Wills, proprietor of vintage store Screaming Mimi's (Cyndi Lauper used to work there). Wills says: "People embrace things so quickly… They move on so fast that they constantly need new references. Around the store we laugh and say, ‘Didn't we already do the '80s? Didn't we have that neon moment five years ago?'"

The answer of course, is yes. And I remember the neon socks I wore in 7th grade so vividly! Plus: My obsession with Swatch watches, rubber bracelets, rhinestone necklaces and plastic skeleton earrings. I liked polka-dot shirts and giant socks by E.G. Smith. And the girls at my school were all decked out in Benetton or NafNaf. Remember Fido Dido? And the leggings! Oh, the leggings. Fashion seemed fun back then: Animal prints, faux-fur, poufy skirts, big shoulders — there was whimsy in getting dressed, and self-expression at work.

And let's face it: A lot of good shit came out of the '80s. Trebay notes:

… the latest fashion cycle an opportunity for a new crop of designers to find in that dubious decade a mother lode of irony ready to be mined. "Dallas," Cabbage Patch Kids, "The Cosby Show" and Princess Diana (whose style Germaine Greer likened last year to that of a TV anchorwoman, but with dreadful and "inevitable" hats) all made their debut in the '80s. So, in an indelible pop-cultural sense, did Brooke Shields, in her "nothing comes between me and my Calvins" phase.

Not to mention: Michael Jackson's "Thriller." Ms. Willis swears that this fall, a studded jacket is "all anybody's going to be looking for."

Of course, the '80s wasn't all brights and happiness. There were the rebels, the edgy activists, the artists, the Guerrilla Girls, Leigh Bowery, Boy George.

But while it does stir up fond memories to see Urban Outfitters serve up striped tees and leopard minis, there's something tragic about going back to the well again and again. It's like a former high school football star who can't stop reliving the homecoming game. Did we peak in the '80s? Are we clinging to the era like a security blanket, coddled by its warmth but afraid to move forward and leave the jelly shoes and the Dirty Dancing plotlines behind? I'd like to hope not. I'm saying this as a person who knows every single word of dialogue in Desperately Seeking Susan: We need to let go of the '80s. There are so many other fashion ideas to explore. Like the here and now! Or the future! Or Mad Men's early '60s.

Right Round, Baby [NY Times]

[Images via All American Ads of the 80s]

Boomer Nostalgia is nothing new: this is the third go-around of Woodstock Memory Mania, after 1994's 25th anniversary celebrations and 1999's 30th anniversary celebrations, which, naturally, were destroyed by my peers, who, unlike our parents, or even our older brothers and sisters who made the trek in '94, couldn't handle sitting in the mud for three days doing psychotropic drugs without starting a bloody riot and essentially burning the place down. Our parents had Hendrix and the Who. In '94, they had . We had Limp Bizkit. So, you understand.

Anyway, Woodstock nostalgia is more than a Boomer merchandising push (though that's a great deal of it), it's a way for people to remind themselves, and younger generations, that for three days, amidst a tumultuous decade, the philosophies of the hippie generation seemed to be true and possible, if only for a moment. It's a cultural touchstone, though one wonders, after the Boomers are gone, if the every 10-15 years celebration of the event (and its apparently crappy music, according to Jim Fusilli of the Wall Street Journal) will continue. I'd say the chances are quite slim.

For those of us born in the 80s, there is no Woodstock to speak of, I suppose: there are festivals and concerts that have special relevance to certain people, and certain musical genres will be attached to us, of course, but our nostalgia, at present, comes in the form of childhood memories. As Michael Cavna of the Washington Post notes, Hollywood is scraping the bottom of the barrel, or toy chest, as far as 80s nostalgia goes, breathing new life into everything from Transformers to G.I. Joe to... Legos?

"This year, in particular, these same Los Angeles producers have purloined my toys, too. How can I leave with warm thoughts of, say, my grade-school Super Soaker when some filmmakers are surely planning to hold my memories hostage at water-gunpoint? They have my childhood and are not afraid to use it," Cavna writes, noting that it's not "just about buying the rights to old toys. The troubling aspect is that the next crop of toy-based films to swamp the multiplex and the record books might increasingly consist of sparkly-but-shallow projects."

Every time an 80s-based film project hits the news, everyone freaks out and starts writing the same thing: "They're ruining my childhood!" But the truth is, your childhood isn't going anywhere. Yes, the films are shallow (there's only so much depth I suppose one can get from a film based on plastic action figures) but that's kind of the point: they are meant to be popcorn movies, mindless, silly remixes of the doll you kept in your pocket when you were 7. Does it suck to see your beloved toys bastardized in such a way? Sometimes. Certainly I never saw Megan Fox vamping up when I had Optimus Prime coming in to Barbie's soda shoppe for a malt, but my memories of the toys and whatever happens on screen are two different things. I love nostalgia, too (obviously), but it's best to separate the originals from the remakes, if only for your own sanity.

In other words, Shia LaBeouf may weasel his way into your favorite franchises, but unless you let him (or, for some of you, unless you want him to), he's not going to make his way into your personal memories. But the consistent retread of Woodstock Mania and the exhausting list of 80s toy and cartoon related projects in the works speaks more to a desire by the audience to hold on to the past, which always seems brighter and shinier than it was, especially now, when we're all dealing with the recession and the madness that surrounds it. It's a totally natural reaction, as nostalgia is comforting, and safe, and a way to remember that things were—or at least seemed like they were—perfect for a time.

However, I agree with Cavna, that this is all part of the problem: it's more about a lack of new memories to make than the "destruction" of the old ones. We shouldn't be complaining about our childhoods being destroyed as much as we should be complaining about the lack of new ideas in the movie theater. So G.I. Joe was turned into a generic action film. Does that really ruin your summer of 1985? Probably not. But maybe it's G.I. Joe's standard blow-shit-up, America Fuck Yeah plot that's really "ruining" things, if only by making your favorite toys generic and kind of boring.

But at least now you know. And knowing is half the battle.

Hollywood Is Scavenging My Toy Chest [WashingtonPost]
Woodstock: But How Was The Music? [Wall Street Journal]

Take this buffalo check shirt, for instance. The pattern was proclaimed as being "everywhere this season" by the LA Times in November 2008. Silll, buffalo check is actually for sale in Topshop right now, and Delia's is carrying it too. Original? No. But no one can beat the (frighteningly) low $12 price tag Miley and Max are offering.

Another item from Miley Cyrus & Max Azria: Liquid leggings. American Apparel pushed these in 2007; When seen on Nicky Hilton in February 2008, we were instantly over them; Miley seems to think they've got life in them yet! Miley gushes: "I'd say anyone from age 8-80 can enjoy this line." Maybe she means "as a source of amusement"?

Leopard comes and goes, from Van Halen to Katy Perry. But we've definitely seen leopard print pants or leggings recently at Urban Outfitters, and at TopShop, Alloy and Delia's.

Of course the kids shopping for Miley's clothes are too young to remember Ginger Spice's Union Jack dress, or Austin Powers' Shaguar, and Lord knows they don't know anything about The Who, but you've got to wonder: Why would Max Azria want to do a Brit flag shirt? Does he just like keeping up with what the kids like? Or does he suspect that — priced at a very affordable $7.00 — this item will fly out of stores?

The ruffled blouses in this collection — in red, white, blue and purple — are actually quite charming, and priced at 12 bucks — well below what J. Crew is asking for a very similar style, though J. Crew's are silk. But the point is: When a world-famous designer who has designed for Hervé Léger, BCBG and his own eponymous labels teams up with a Disney Teen Queen, the results are generic, run-of-the-mill but probably people-pleasing — just like a Hannah Montana song.

SNEAK PEEK: Miley Cyrus & Max Azria's Design Collaboration! [People]
Miley Cyrus & Max Azria [Wal-Mart]

According to the press release, Kim's new #1 Buns Workout, Fit In Your Jeans By Friday, enlists her fave trainers for "no excuse, no equipment" drills which will have you "wriggling into the latest denim trends in no time." This means doing squats and lunges so you can wear cigarette jeans; isolating abs so you can wear "tummy baring" boyfriend jeans; and doing cha cha and mambo steps to get a great booty for high waisted jeans.

Oh, by cigarette jeans they mean skinny jeans; but someone made the wise executive decision not to use the word skinny. Though in the press release, Kim says: "For me, skinny is just a style of jeans - not a goal."

Obviously, there's nothing wrong with promoting exercise, but isn't Kim's "keep your curves" attitude at odds with "get slim quick"? If you can't fit into your own jeans now, is it really possible that you'll get into them by Friday?

Luckily, it's tough to get too agitated about this, since the promotional video on the site is so hilarious. Kim swears, "I'm always trying to figure out how I can get in my jeans by Friday." And! If you listen closely you can hear Kim describe her body as "volumptuous." She claims her look in the workout videos — she wears shimmery spandex and leather gloves — is "high fashion" and "Eighties but futuristic." As for the set, it is supposed to be a "French Parisian apartment," which Kim says is "authentic me."

Kim Kardashian Says Real Women Keep Their Curves With 'Fit In Your Jeans By Friday' [PR Newswire]
Related: Fit In Your Jeans By Friday

Just start carrying a small stuffed animal as a conversation piece and spilling your drink on attractive men and you'll never be stuck at home watching Dallas reruns by yourself again!

The Art Of Meeting Men [Videogum]

Did you know that Rayon was the season's most important fabric in the summer of 1986? Did you know that her peculiar, unfortunate shirt was called an "angel top"? Well, now you do. International Male does God's work.

The beefy, blond Aryan type loses his appeal when he's in pseudo-military gear, in my opinion. It takes me back to when, as a wee lass, I found out Rolfe was a Nazi in the Sound Of Music. Sniff.

"It's a natural! Just as natural as what my hand is doing in my pocket right now. It must be natural — it feels so good!"

Which would you rather find out the man in your life wears: The supertrimmer? Or Le Masque? Think carefully.

Oooh, "classics"! Denim short-shorts, camo bikini undies, chest-hair revealing tank tops and "Foreign Legion" brozner. Collect 'em all!

The Key Largo shirt is mildly horrifying. The peach canvas suit is Miami Nice. But let's focus on the Dickens Glasses, shall we? Because it is taking all my power not to make a joke like, "They're called that because you wear them when you want to get a dick in you."

Isn't it funny how all the '80s styles now are on svelte, emaciated hipster boys? These fashions look so different with a little hair and brawn thrown in.

And by "For Her" they mean, "For when he feels like gettin' freaky."

Just because this kind of shock and awe is a little unorthodox doesn't mean it's ineffective.

The swimsuits of 1986 were actually quite tame when compared to what's going on over there now.

Guido Slacks. 'Nuff said.

The soft focus, the sad, subservient, irrelevant female, the women's underwear that looks like men's underwear: Genius.

A new attitude! In unnecessary glasses! And is it me, or is that shoe on the right downright obscene?

Earlier: UnderGear: No Boxers, No Briefs... From The People Who Brought You International Male
Searching For The Worst Outfit In 'International Male'

Clip above; the comments are for arguing over your fave John Hughes film (A toss-up between Weird Science and Sixteen Candles, although next week I'll change my mind to The Breakfast Club or European Vacation.)

John Hughes' Imprint Remains [LA Times]
Long Duk Dong: Last of the Hollywood Stereotypes? [NPR]
What's With the John Hughes Nostalgia? [GalleyCat]
Pretty In Pink [YouTube]
Earlier: Sixteen Candles Or Pretty In Pink: Which Is Better?

Paris is "skinny fat," Rios explains. "Clearly she is not truly fat, but she has no meat nor muscle tone and generally looks unhealthy. Plus, Ms. Hilton has horrible posture." Rios also gets into Tara, Nicole and Courtney's body dysmorphia, and, as an added bonus, runs down a list of "ladies who the media calls "curvy," but in real life, are totally petite and perfect-bodied:"

1. Catherine Zeta-Jones: Don't be a Zeta- hata! She's probably a 4.
2. Salma Hayek: No more than a size 2 or 4 with perfect boobs and butt.
3. Penelope Cruz: Ditto.
4. Scarlett Johansson: Ditto, again.
5. Shakira: Hips don't lie? What hips! She is a pixie.

Fat Celebrity Sex Symbols? Misty Rios Breaks it Down. [ClubPlanet.com]

[London, July 18. Image via SplashNews]