MTV will air the third episode of SKINS tonight. Despite the fact that its been universally panned, I gave Skins a chance. (2.7 on IMDB. 2.7! Try and find another television show with a number like that.) Spoiler alert: It sucked. Here is my story.
When I first heard that MTV was producing a remake of the popular British television show Skins, I said, "There's a popular British television show called Skins? What's it about?" Eventually, I found out that it was a show about teenagers getting drunk, getting high and getting laid. Sounded promising enough. The fact that it was popular in England and we would be getting a remake didn't sound all that promising. Especially since it was on MTV.
MTV's last scripted adventure was the Hard Times of RJ Berger. (I even surprised myself by remembering the actual name of that show.) Couple that with the fact that its an American remake of a British hit (The Office... and what else has worked?) and you've got a recipe for awfulness.
Oh, and then there's the fact that every promo (And dear Beth Gaga Shaggy were there a lot of promos) looked like utter shit. Sorry, it just did.
However, there was a Jersey Shore lead-in and I have a morbid curiosity to see any television show that is bad so that I can feel good about making fun of it. Did Skins ever live up (down?) to that.
From the opening scene to... every scene that followed, I hated that show. It was horrible, unbelievable and unrealistic. Plus, every single character was an asshole. There wasn't a single person on the entire show that I liked. The lead kid is a douche. The buddy with the shaved head wears sleeveless shirts. (His parents obviously didn't check the closet for the Sleeve Monster) Who are these people? None of them act like real teenagers. And what kind of awful parents would ever let their kids get away with shit like this?
Look, I have no problem suspending disbelief, but I thought this was supposed to be sort realistic. I just couldn't believe any of it.
Having been perfectly underwhelmed, I had to see the original which happens to be on Netflix streaming. Minutes after the American version of Skins had finished, I watched the first episode of the original.
It was pretty damn good. The characters were likable, and funny and seemed more like real people. Even though they were doing the exact same things that I found completely unrealistic in the remake. I have no problem with the Brits crashing a rich kid party, stealing a car, accidentally putting it into a river and walking away, but the idea of something like that happening in the remake is absolutely preposterous.
In the original, you could see how people would be friends with Tony. Sid isn't a goofy character. he's a nice, quiet kid. In the remake, Tony is a douchebag who I can imagine anyone wanting to be friends with. His face is infinitely punchable. In the remake, Sid/Stanley is a slimy looking retard with long hair in his eyes. Who gives a shit if he's a virgin? He should be.
Obviously, I'm not some old-school Skins die-hard who abhorred the remake as soon as I heard about it. I'm just a guy who stumbled onto the show and was abhorred at what I found. Its sad that the advertisers are dropping out because of the subject matter instead of the actual product. Imagine that.
The more that I read and the more that I see of the original and remake just make me scratch my head. Characters have been changed for no good reason. Story lines and details are confused. Its just a clusterfuck from start to finish. I'm not offended that they remade this. I'm offended that they made this.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Monday, January 10, 2011
On Saturday night I sat down to watch Julie & Julia with my best gal. Of course, anyone familiar with my body of work assumes that it was my idea, but I swear Marie A. is the one who brought the DVD home.
We watched Julie & Julia through the lens of two bloggers. One of us gets paid to make fairly obvious jokes about sports on a blog - the other writes about 18th century France for fun. We've both been blogging for years now. And maybe that's why the movie was absolutely maddening.
The performances were fine. We had both heard that Amy Adams' Julie portion of the movie sucked while Meryl Streep pwneffed the role of Julia Child. I though made-up-to-appear frumpy Amy Adams was just fine. They gave her a bad early 21st-century haircut and decided she would wear baggy clothes as her character ingested 3500 butter-soaked calories every day for a year. Personally, I thought Streep's Child was cartoonish, but that's Julia Child.
So all that - the main characters, the supporting characters, the dialog - was just fine. It was your normal, light romantic comedy with a little twist of telling two different, but similar stories at once. Good for them.
I HATED Julie & Julia. As a blogger, it offended me. It angered me. It made me want to look up the IP addresses of every single one of her commenters and fly around the country kicking their asses like the end of *spoiler alert* Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back. This idiot housewife got a fucking book deal because there was an article on her in the New York Times? Not just one, but 60 literary agents and publishers called that day? Is this really how it happened? Why are people so stupid? She wrote about recreating a cookbook and multiple people with the power to do so decided that it should be turned into a book? Why would you turn that into a book?
READ THE BLOG. ITS FREE. WHAT MORE COULD SHE ADD IN A BOOK? WHY!?!?!?
In the end, the movie made me both mad and depressed. Don't watch this movie alone. Or preferably, at all.