The first word that usually comes to mind when discussing “Skins,” E4’s wildly popular teenage drama, is controversy. I knew that before even seeing the show because of MTV’s failed attempt at adapting the series for American television. While the British version attempts to accomplish the goal of tackling real teenage issues, it does so haphazardly and in my mind, attempts to bite off more than it can chew. Sensationalism isn’t the problem with the original version like it is with the MTV’s—rather, the show spreads itself thin.
First and foremost, I think it is important that the British version has its heart in the right place. I felt the British version was simply trying to tackle too much rather than being too controversial. The emphasis here is the show’s effort and failure in accomplishing its goals as a program, rather than the content itself. To me, what the show depicts—homosexuality, drug use, sex, eating disorders, underage drinking, family problems, and religion—certainly deserves a place on television. In fact, I think it is commendable “Skins” is trying to do something with all of these very relevant topics. Rather than shy away from very real issues that would apply to its young viewers, “Skins” tackles them head on—and for me, that is where the show fails.
In the very first episode, “Skins” already is biting off more than it can chew in my mind. It tackles all of these issues mentioned above without really devoting time to fully addressing one. Rather than going in-depth, it introduces them all like a pu-pu platter of teenage angst and expects the viewer to be shocked, intrigued, and drawn in to the show. Instead, I felt like I was watching television ADD and didn’t really forge a connection with any of the characters or identify with their issues. I realize “Tony” was the first episode of the first series, and we get a little more in-depth with Cassie’s eating disorder in the next episode, but “Skins” is nevertheless relentless in its pursuit of covering all of these problems. By trying to address so many aspects of the teenage lifestyle, I feel like no one aspect of the teenage experience is fully explored and I was left wanting for more.
That being said, and having seen some episodes of the American series, I feel it is important to address some of the UK version’s shortcomings in comparison to MTV’s version. The US version seems to be more shallow and controversial for controversy’s sake, rather than trying to tackle challenging issues—for instance, by replacing Maxxie with an attractive girl who does not really address the same aspect of teenage life as in the UK version, MTV leans to sensationalism rather trying to depict the struggle of a teenager trying to understand their sexuality. While “Skins” in the UK is a good show that tries to do a little too much at times, it has a heart—something that was lost in the American translation.
I completely agree with these statements regarding both the UK and US versions of Skins. The UK output had a heart, and true intent. The US reworking fell flat in attempting to inject the same sort of genuineness by addressing teenage issues. While I think it is a little harsh to judge the entire show based on the first two episodes, I do agree that the formatting of both productions is quite scattered in the aim of giving every character enough attention. I watched every episode of the US version before it was canceled and found it entertaining at times. However, I was not devastated when it was taken off the air due to the fact that I never fully connected with any character. The UK version does a better job of getting viewers to connect to their teenager characters, which attests to its success.
I also concur that the UK version of Skins seemed to be trying a little too hard. While I appreciate that the show employs a specific aim and targets a particular audience, the plot lines appeared somewhat forced and unnatural. For example, the ambivalence portrayed by Cassie’s parents regarding her eating disorder and the whole Mad Hatter drug situation really turned me off. I have not seen the US version so I do not have a means for comparison, but I found myself really struggling to understand or enjoy the characters in the UK version. I would have preferred to see more compelling, realistic and relatable plot lines. I think this realism would have contributed to a greater connection with the characters. By the end of the screening, I either didn’t like the characters, wasn’t rooting for them or found myself feeling apathetic.
The idea of cramming too many issues into one show isn’t something unique to Skins. When I first started watching the American series, I found myself thinking it was a lot like Degrassi, which is not a very aspirational label in my book. With Degrassi, you started out with a normal group of kids and then everything that could go wrong in a teenager’s life happened to this small circle of friends, and after a while you just felt annoyed. Skins sort of starts out on that overload, although I think it definitely has more heart. I think Kelly has hit on the problem that the show kind of highlights these issues right off the bat and makes you see that first, instead of seeing a character as a relatable kid like you.
I think I had some pretty lofty expectations in terms of the how un-realistic this show would be, and I thus found Skins to be fairly realistic in comparison. Having watched a few more episodes, I think the show slows down a bit in its focus on individual characters later in the series. Skins does only have 10 episodes to cram in as much plot and character development as possible, so I’ll give it an allowance for perhaps putting too much on our plates as viewers. Most friend groups have a few people who don’t do anything some weeks, and, occasionally, kids have stable home lives or stay in to study all weekend. But this is TV, and I appreciate how realistically they did portray the characters in the situations presented. I also do believe there’s a bit of a cultural divide. From my time studying abroad in London and after talking to a friend who lived there from ages 12 to 20, I really do think late night ragers, casual sex, and habitual drug use are much more common there for youths (or at least more commonly out in the open). Just look at the content of any of the other youth-oriented shows we’ve watched.
I agree with a lot of what has been said about some of “Skins”s shortcomings in these few first episodes. While I did not have trouble find the characters compelling enough to tune back in, it is these characters that are the heart of the show, and if those first episodes don’t draw a viewer in because of these characters, then that is a problem. “Skins” has a very special place in my heart, though, and I think it’s important to add that, while a lot of the major teenage issues brought up in the first two episodes are sometimes only touched on but never dealt with, these issues recur throughout the series and are part of a gradual process of narrative and character development. While single episodes focus on individual characters, that same cast plays a part in nearly all episodes, and each character usually has two focused episodes per season. In doing this, the issues like eating disorders, sexual orientation and drug use do come back, frequently, and are dealt with in great depth and with great respect to teenage life. The flaw of that, though, is that if those first few episodes don’t make you want to come back for more, you’ll never see the full development of these plot threads play out, often in very mature ways.