|
Skins
Mar 20, 2010 3:26:22 GMT
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Mar 20, 2010 3:26:22 GMT
I have to disagree about Lily Loveless' acting, sorry. Actually, you know what, it wasn't the acting that was all that bad, but the writing. I've been in love with you since I was 12? What? That whole speech was thoroughly ridiculous, and way too late in the season for me to be suitably impressed. Of course, I teared up a bit anyway, because they're lesbians in love! and I am a sap. I agree Naomily's story was rushed (like most things, I think this season was originally planned out as 10 episodes but then they get slashed to 8 cos of the recession. Those two extra episodes could have made all the difference) was a bit weird that living together miserably for seven months was solved with a wave of the magic speechy wand. However, I like how the speech basically "flip-reversed" everything that had been pre-established about Naomily. You know Emily was the one who did all the persuing and seem the most into it and Naomi was less sure of her sexuality. After finding out about Naomi's dead girl shagging antics this year I was a bit soured on the whole couple and though Emily should just drop the dithering cockslut. I think it was quite cool how they revealled that actually Naomi had always loved Emily and loved her before she was loved back.. PLUS always knew about her sexuality. I've disliked Naomi for most of the show's run and I wanted to give her a hug (Naomi is my Mum's favourite character for some reason!).
|
|
|
Skins
Mar 20, 2010 19:27:21 GMT
Post by tarantella on Mar 20, 2010 19:27:21 GMT
I think this season was originally planned out as 10 episodes but then they get slashed to 8 cos of the recession. Those two extra episodes could have made all the difference I didn't know this! That makes a lot of sense. However, I like how the speech basically "flip-reversed" everything that had been pre-established about Naomily. You know Emily was the one who did all the persuing and seem the most into it and Naomi was less sure of her sexuality. After finding out about Naomi's dead girl shagging antics this year I was a bit soured on the whole couple and though Emily should just drop the dithering cockslut. I think it was quite cool how they revealled that actually Naomi had always loved Emily and loved her before she was loved back.. PLUS always knew about her sexuality. I've disliked Naomi for most of the show's run and I wanted to give her a hug (Naomi is my Mum's favourite character for some reason!). That's cool. I guess I still feel that it was unnecessary to rewrite the history we'd already witnessed, particularly when it was done more as a telling rather than a showing, and at the end of the series when then their storyline wasn't going to go anywhere. I don't understand what purpose that twist served. Also, I actually really liked Naomi's process of coming to understand her sexuality in season three, and the speech sort of undermined that. Because while some people have always known their orientations from the start, for others there is a journey toward self-awareness, and I liked that the writers told this other story. I was really excited about Naomi at the beginning of season three, because we kept being told how she was very passionate about politics and feminism and was so smart! etc., but then we never really saw any of that. (Also, I find it really hard to believe that she got, what, 3 A's during a year that she had all these relationship problems and guilt from sleeping with a girl that stalked her and then committed suicide.) I don't think we've seen characters do well in school since Tony, either -- like, hey, Panda got into Harvard! Well, okay, if you say so. I guess that's something I would like the writers to work on in general: More showing, less telling! I would have loved to see Panda studying (or doing anything, poor girl was terribly shunted this season), or Naomi attending some protest, or JJ playing Magic the Gathering or D&D or whatever. Relationships are important, but they don't tell you everything about an individual.
|
|
|
Skins
Mar 22, 2010 21:43:35 GMT
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Mar 22, 2010 21:43:35 GMT
You won't get any arguments from me in the "Naomi's political nature was an blatent informed ability" stakes. The thing is.. I think flip-reversing established events was the only thing they could have done to make me buy the Naomily realtionship as a healthy one. The whole thing had got to be like watching a puppy get kicked in the face in regards Emily and she just looked weak for staying with Naomi and Naomi looked cold and oh god, if she was STILL doubting, it'd just never work! I agree the realtionship was badly handled forcing a rushed outcome in the finale (hell most of the finale seems to be "cleaning up the mess" of a disorganised season), I would rather seen a gay couple deal with the almost mundane pressures of "getting serious" and moving in together etc then all the dead girl drama. Also.. there's a rather nice "Unseen Skins" based around Panda studying for her history exam, and during series 3 there was ones based around JJ on "RateYourMagic.com" and Naomi at a protest march. I'll defend the Thomas/Panda Harvard ending too... it was an uber unrealistic fairytale ending, but I have no problem with that. It's a surreal/hyperreal show, the writers have said it isn't MEANT to be a realistic show, plot wise, it's a dramady not gritty social realism. In general I've got no time for "so unrealistic!" nitpicking.. remember the Mystery Science Theatre 3000 mantra man.. "if you're wondering how he eats and sleeps and other science facts, then repeat to yourself.. it's just a show, I should really just relax." Anyway.. anyone who likes Skins skip to 9.19 on this podcast www.guardian.co.uk/film/audio/2010/mar/18/film-weekly-podcast for exciting news. Looks like the makers of the show left a lack of closure in some respects to the finale knowing we'd see these characters again..
|
|
|
Skins
Mar 23, 2010 3:06:42 GMT
Post by helwin tins on Mar 23, 2010 3:06:42 GMT
Good news, I hope, however a This Is England series? That could end horribly.
|
|
|
Skins
Mar 23, 2010 3:55:10 GMT
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Mar 23, 2010 3:55:10 GMT
Jack Thorne is SUCH a good writer, he wrote many of the best Skins episodes from the first generation like "Effy" from series one and the series two finale if anyone can make a film work it's him. Also if anyone can make a This Is England TV series work.. it's him tooo (he'll be working with Shane Meadows on that one, which is also encouraging) He also spoke about being in talks to write a Doctor Who episode on his twitter, though he's not on the list of writers for the next series. I wish Who would employ some younger up and coming writers.
But.. yes! Side issues... if Cassie isn't in the film (which is possible given Hannah Murray's commitments as a Cambridge student) I'm officially going to Effy my wrists. I'm thinking it'll just be cameos for the first generation characters, but it's better than nothing I suppose. The thought of Cassie and Cook in the same scene! It'd be the fucked up teenager equivalant to Superman vs The Amazing Spiderman!
|
|
|
Skins
Mar 23, 2010 22:39:50 GMT
Post by Rhiflect on Mar 23, 2010 22:39:50 GMT
Oh Josh! I lol'd.
|
|
|
Skins
Apr 7, 2010 23:48:52 GMT
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Apr 7, 2010 23:48:52 GMT
I was just watching the start of series one with my Mum who started watching with me in S4 and I didn't know if she'd get past the acid test of bullshit that is the pilot episode, but she laughed at all the bits even I think are stupid!
In other news Kaya "Effy" Scodelario has been cast as Cathy in the upcoming big screen version of Wuthering Heights. She beat out Natalie Portman for the role apparently. Cook for Heathcliff plz?
|
|
|
Skins
Apr 8, 2010 10:46:13 GMT
Post by Rhiflect on Apr 8, 2010 10:46:13 GMT
Oh god.
Effy is in a film called 'Shank'. Why is she Cathy?!
|
|
|
Skins
Apr 9, 2010 23:49:15 GMT
Post by Alicia Marie on Apr 9, 2010 23:49:15 GMT
fact. Jack O'Connell was in a TV adaption of Wuthering Heights made in 2009 as a delivery boy.
|
|
|
Skins
May 27, 2010 9:07:06 GMT
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on May 27, 2010 9:07:06 GMT
|
|
|
Skins
May 27, 2010 9:24:14 GMT
Post by admin on May 27, 2010 9:24:14 GMT
Hmm... won't know it 'til I've tried it, but I'm sceptical about the film because...
What's the point?
Skins looks brilliant on telly, it's an exceptionally well-directed drama, ambitious, well-written - it takes bigs risks, sometimes makes big mistakes, but reaps bigger rewards because of it - and I don't know why they can't just... leave it there. I think it'll lose something, on film. Visually, and in terms of not having room to tell the types of stories Skins tells, structured as a film, particularly if they're going to fill it to the brim with cameos from old cast members. Which will put non-fans off, whether or not it makes sense...
I think this is probably a bad idea, I don't know why they don't just do a film 'from the makers of Skins'.
Cheerio, Michael. xxx
|
|
|
Skins
May 27, 2010 9:53:30 GMT
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on May 27, 2010 9:53:30 GMT
That's all well and good Micheal but if "If Cassie doesn't appear we'll slash the seats" Though that might be appropriate rock'n'roll anarchy for a Skins film. I also suggest "Skins:Citizen Caned" for the title.
|
|
|
Skins
May 27, 2010 11:36:25 GMT
Post by admin on May 27, 2010 11:36:25 GMT
I demand they sack Jack Thorne immediately and put you on the script. Four hours of Cassie wafting about, being psuedo-poetic and showing her fancy pants a lot... what more could anyone ask for? Cheerio, Michael. xxx
|
|
|
Skins
May 28, 2010 13:07:20 GMT
Post by Rhiflect on May 28, 2010 13:07:20 GMT
Wat.
I'm not holding high hopes for this, to be honest. I don't think I trust them enough to make something film-worthy, in terms of acting and possibly storyline. There's only so many 'teenage controversial issues'. But anyway, it's a Josh jizz-fest if Cassie features, so that's always a plus!
|
|
|
Skins
May 28, 2010 13:20:44 GMT
Post by admin on May 28, 2010 13:20:44 GMT
Josh jizz-fest if Cassie features, so that's always a plus! You dirty devil. Cheerio, Michael. xxx
|
|
|
Skins
May 28, 2010 13:31:36 GMT
Post by Rhiflect on May 28, 2010 13:31:36 GMT
That's not quite what I meant, but the sentiment still remains.
Or something.
|
|
|
Skins
May 28, 2010 19:07:03 GMT
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on May 28, 2010 19:07:03 GMT
Wat. I'm not holding high hopes for this, to be honest. I don't think I trust them enough to make something film-worthy, in terms of acting and possibly storyline. There's only so many 'teenage controversial issues'. But anyway, it's a Josh jizz-fest if Cassie features, so that's always a plus! I'd feel the same if Jack Thorne wasn't writing. This guy is a seriously awesome writer responsible for most of the best bits of s1/2. I just want to see my favourite fictional character/FICTION TWIN one last time so much I'm willing to look past the "Skins.. movie? What an absurd idea" that all the logical parts of my mind might lean toward. Also you're wrong, they haven't covered every controversial issue. What about necrophilia? Then Freddie could be in it..
|
|
|
Skins
May 29, 2010 8:51:03 GMT
Post by Rhiflect on May 29, 2010 8:51:03 GMT
Haha! Okay, granted. And no one's physically disabled yet. OH NO WAIT Tony was. But yeah, it'll be an interesting film either way, and I'm excited. It's just that the excitement is covered with a layer of 'ohh god this could be cringe'.
|
|
|
Skins
Aug 5, 2010 16:09:52 GMT
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Aug 5, 2010 16:09:52 GMT
|
|
|
Skins
Aug 5, 2010 20:35:21 GMT
Post by wasabi87 on Aug 5, 2010 20:35:21 GMT
Ahhh, coool!!! Thanks for that! ;D Can hardly wait til Skins series 5... have to wait for the DVD box... But I have to say... uhm they're not looking really cool... I like the boy on the left and then... uhm... but okay maybe it's better on TV ;D
|
|