Skip to content

Skins Gets More Naked: The Recap!

February 1, 2011
tags:

[This post is brought to you by: lemonadeandlemoncake]

Let’s see what the American bunch of delinquents over at Skins are up to this week, shall we? I expected this to be jam-packed with controversy due to all the bad publicity it’s been getting – but no. I was a little disappointed. The way it sounded, this was going to be a naked orgy with cocaine. Nope.

Close, though, because Chris’s mom left him $1k and told him to take care of himself. He did what any teenager would do- threw an epic party. Sid attempted with no avail to get laid – the drunk girl who was hanging on him never said yes. Chris’s (prosthetic) penis plays a prominent role in this episode as he decided to take a few Viagra pills just for kicks.

Tony makes a rude comment about Michelle’s breasts and Michelle decides to taunt their friend with the worst timing skills in the world, Stan, by showing him her breasts and asking his opinion. That was adorable. A lot of the episode focuses on what Chris is going to do once someone kicks him out of his house (naked.) Chris’s butt is shown for a few seconds as he walks down the street, and I’m  confused that this caused everyone to lose their shit and pull sponsorship?  But the lesbian sex from the last episode didn’t make the PTC bat their eyes.

Daisy forces Chris over to his dad’s house, and his dad doesn’t want him. In the most awkward of scenes, Tea attempts to make Tony as uncomfortable as she can by flashing the group her breasts. It works. I like how Tony doesn’t even attempt to act cocky in this series. Cadie asks Stan out (YES!) and unlike his British counterpart, he says yes without implying that she has no reason to ask him. The end of the episode finds Chris luckily under a roof – that of his teacher, Tina.

They are inevitably going to bone, which leaves Chris with a smile on his face as the episode ends. Tune in next week as we get to know my already favorite character, Cadie.

Advertisements
9 Comments leave one →
  1. February 1, 2011 8:17 am

    What impact do you think the public outcry has had on the show? Do you think it was wasted, given the show’s numbers have slide since the splashy debut? Also, loving these recaps! You are capturing the show in a way that those familiar and unfamiliar are able to take something away from your posts. 🙂

  2. February 1, 2011 10:38 am

    Snarky’s, thank you! And I think it’s mostly pretty bad, because it equates to loss of sponsorship in this case, which if it gets bad enough will reduce them to shaking their tin cup and Hollywood doesn’t do humble. However if they can survive that aspect, it will even out and it’ll be good. When people talk, more people watch to see for themselves what all the fuss is about, even when the talk is bad. Usually controversy is good and if there was none, they wouldn’t have been in People magazine and people would still say “what’s Skins?” Outside of tumble if you mention the show.

  3. Karen permalink
    February 1, 2011 12:58 pm

    I think part of the failure has to do with the fact that it’s a copy of a well-successful UK show. And fans of the original, mostly love the intellect and fluidity of the original show. America, especially MTV, just can’t do it justice. BTW: How’s the American version of Shameless doing on Showtime?

  4. February 2, 2011 3:51 am

    I like how people say that the American version of Skins can’t do the UK version justice but the exact same people who wrote the UK one (Jamie Brittain, Bryan Elsley, and in some episodes, Jack Thorne) wrote the US one. They made it. It’s the same Skins. It’s not someone else doing a pale imitation. It’s tame, of freaking course, because they have their hands tied behind their backs.

    And everyone (EVERYONE) has already gotten the point that nothing will be able to live up to the UK Skins. Most people have been saying that since series 2 came out. You know what? That’s true. It’s very true. It can’t live up to it. NOTHING CAN.

    Nick Hoult, Mike Bailey, Hannah Murray, April Pearson and the rest of them? They topped it and you can’t go higher. No one’s trying.

    I think a lot of people watched the pilot, tried to measure it up and were disappointed by the obvious fact that no one could match up to the British one. Well, obviously no one’s going to, but they’re not even trying. ‘Walk, then run’ Elsley said on his twitter back when the controversy first started. He said they’re going to be exactly the same for a little while but then deviate and do something completely new. So really.

    This isn’t just ‘not as good as the British Skins.’ If people would stop trying to put a camel through the eye of a needle, they’d stop seeing all that. I see parallelism in the episodes all the time because in a show set up with the framework that Skins is, paralells are inevitable and very, very fun to connect. I’m just saying, critics need to come up with something less redundant than ‘it’s not as good as the UK Skins.’

    I know that. The writers know that. The actors (a couple of them fans of the UK version) know that. Let’s see Skins US for what it is, shall we? An entirely new creature.
    /end rant.

  5. Jodi Bryant permalink
    February 2, 2011 5:57 am

    This show is my new favorite guilty pleasure watching. I’m glad I haven’t watched the UK version and can remain ignorant to how shitty the MTV version is. Are these “teens” actually teens? they look a bit older than their supposed ages.

  6. February 2, 2011 3:27 pm

    Nope they’re all fifteen to nineteen years old. And watch the UK version. Do it. Do it. Do it. The mtv version isn’t that shitty.

  7. February 2, 2011 3:42 pm

    I really think something was lost in the translation as Skins made it stateside. Whether its the mores of US society or inability to translate the material to satisfy both the tastes of the advertisers and audiences familiar with the original. In either case, 90% of the problem with these across-the-pond reboots is the fact they are completely unnecessary. American television writers have never understood what makes their UK counterparts so successful. Frankly, American television is too attached to appealing to the lowest common denominator and terrified of not having mass appeal. Skins is a niche show, which appeals to specific market, like other shows originating in the UK. To American broadcasters being a niche product means you’ve failed at being a product with mass appeal and not that you’ve been successful at attracting the very audience you sought to attract.

  8. February 3, 2011 12:58 am

    I think that you can’t beat skins uk period, but it’s not horrible. not perfect, but not horrible. it’d be less iffy if they had more creative freedom.

  9. February 3, 2011 1:00 am

    i think the same lost in translation-ness happened when skins UK went from series 1 to series 2, though.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: