Skip to main content

Talk Back: "Skins" Episode Two

While I was out last night at Digital LA's entertainment media goes social panel at the Writers Guild, I'm hoping that many of you stayed in to watch the latest installment of Skins on BBC America.

(BTW, astute viewers may have noticed the gorgeous new Skins Season Three promo currently running on BBC America which features a host of pithy quotes about the series from yours truly. Pretty flattering, to be honest.)

Given that this is the second week of the third season--and, given the cast changes, essentially a new series in and of itself--I'm extremely curious to see what you thought of last night's episode. Are the new characters growing on you more this week or are you still missing Sid, Cassie, Tony, and the rest of the original gang? Does Effy anchor the new cast? Are you intrigued by Cook or turned off by his bluster? Are the twins adorably mismatched or just misunderstood?

And, most importantly, are you going to tune in again next week?

Talk back here.

Next week on Skins ("Thomas"), Thomas arrives from the Congo homeless and penniless and lands himself in trouble with Johnny White; the gang discover that Thomas may be the answer to their problems when they realize he has one advantage over the sinister gangster.

Comments

Myles said…
I think, for me, this was the beginning of the season falling off the rails.

One of the things that drew me into the show was that it largely defies expectations - while it may present itself as a teen drama, focusing on characters who fulfill stock roles, beneath that surface there is something deeper that allows you to become attached to them in a realistic way. The show was at its most stylistic, and at its best in my mind, when it went into these characters' alternate worlds and discovered something new about them.

The problem with "Cook" is that it refuses to do what I was begging it to do, which is humanize Cook. I think Cook's a complete tool, and I don't think this is a mistaken observation - the premiere establishes him as a rebel without a cause with nary a care in the world, and it's hard not to question his motives and the like. So when I realized that Episode Two was all about "Cook," I was waiting for the hook, the element of his story that would make me care about him at a level deeper than comic relief.

Instead, it was the exact opposite: the episode confirms his previous behaviour, turning him into a performing monkey, a glutton, and a sex-obsessed jerk. These elements of his character are an acquired taste, sure, and I won't lie that the episode does a mighty fine job of confirming those parts of his personality. However, I needed more than a song and dance to be able to find Cook endearing as opposed to repulsive, and this seemed as good a time as any.

I won't spoil the remainder of the season, where Cook's character does gain some complexity, but I needed more of that in this episode as someone who prefers Skins when it's being subtle and dramatic rather than when it's being brash. I like Mackenzie Crook, but the combination of his over the top performance and Cook's general "larger than life" (read: unrealistic) behaviour turns Skins into a show that doesn't capture what made the first few seasons so enjoyable.
Barrett said…
So far, I'm really enjoying this season. It's not as earth-shattering as the first two seasons but the characters are interesting and charismatic and I'm easily drawn into their weird, messed up worlds.
Anonymous said…
I have to agree with Myles.
I'm planning to keep watching, for now, but if this had been my first taste of Skins, I would not be coming back.
steph said…
I might be in the minority, but i liked it. Will be watching more.
Anonymous said…
Wasn't as bad as everyone is making it out to be.
Anonymous said…
I'm from England where all of the 3rd series of skins has already aired and all I can say is KEEP WATCHING it gets a hell of alot better!!
Nadia said…
I'm from England where all of the 3rd series of skins has already aired and all i can say is KEEP WATCHING it gets a hell of alot better!!

Popular posts from this blog

Katie Lee Packs Her Knives: Breaking News from Bravo's "Top Chef"

The android has left the building. Or the test kitchen, anyway. Top Chef 's robotic host Katie Lee Joel, the veritable "Uptown Girl" herself (pictured at left), will NOT be sticking around for a second course of Bravo's hit culinary competition. According to a well-placed insider, Joel will "not be returning" to the show. No reason for her departure was cited. Unfortunately, the perfect replacement for Joel, Top Chef judge and professional chef Tom Colicchio, will not be taking over as the reality series' host (damn!). Instead, the show's producers are currently scouring to find a replacement for Joel. Top Chef 's second season was announced by Bravo last month, but no return date has been set for the series' ten-episode sophomore season. Stay tuned as this story develops. UPDATE (6/27): Bravo has now confirmed the above story .

Me Want Food: Jenna Gets Famously Fat on "30 Rock"

I don't know about you, but I've already ordered my "Me Want Food" t-shirt from the NBC store. Last night's episode of 30 Rock ("Jack Gets in the Game") was, in my opinion, one of the strongest of the series and has officially pushed the zany comedy into the realm of Arrested Development : deftly plotted and intricately layered, with so many jokes piled atop of jokes that it requires several viewings in order to catch them all. While at its heart, 30 Rock is a workplace comedy, it's left that narrow pigeonhole behind to become a witty example of how intelligent and taut humor can work (and flourish) on television... and exist in harmony with hilarious throwaways like the Thriller -inspired Werewolf Bar Mitzvah music video that would have done the AD crew proud. I want Will Arnett to appear on this series whenever possible. His gay exec Devin is hilarious, manipulative, and has an inexplicable weakness for Kenneth the Page, but he claims to have

"Gilmore" Guy: Who is New Showrunner David Rosenthal?

A few days later and I am still processing the news that Gilmore Girls showrunner Amy Sherman-Palladino--and her exceptionally talented husband, writer and producer Daniel Palladino-- announced their departure from the whip-smart drama after six seasons. The news wouldn't be such a blow, save for the fact that Gilmore Girls is as much about Amy and Daniel as it is about Lorelai and Rory. In their capable hands, the show explored a supremely complicated family dynamic through the beautiful friendship of mother and daughter Lorelai and Rory... and did so with smart dialogue usually found in a Nick & Nora film rather than on television. Zany subplots abounded as did quirky, beloved supporting characters. And now, after six seasons (including this most recent--and very shaky--season where Amy and Daniel wrote less episodes than usual), Amy and Daniel are passing on the showrunning torch to... Dave Rosenthal?!? For those of you in the audience unfamiliar with David Rosenthal ,