Alright bbs-- chill out! It could be okay... maybe.

Aug 24, 2009 21:41

Fair warning: you may not agree with a lot of this. Bitch at me as you will, just don't be surprised if I call you a cunt right back. It's just my opinion, but I don't presume or assume I'm winning any hearts or minds with this post. Just thought I'd say that upfront. Also, sorry about any spelling or grammar errors. this was typed in a flourish.

Ok ( Read more... )

skins, moments of meta, media majors do it better!, fan geekery, calming the masses, adaptations are wonky, rants, nerd moments

Leave a comment

queengreen August 25 2009, 03:16:20 UTC
Well I will say we're opposed on the whole Baltimore thing, but hey, to each their own right. : )

I'm actually really surprised that people think the whole sex thing will be different on MTV. I mean a lot of the swearing will be gone, but this is the network that brought you such classics as Undresses and A Shot At Love. I'm more worried about the whole sex thing deriding into trashy territory, but I don't think the network has ever shied away from the outright sex topic. Now how they'll handle the whole orientation components, well that I don't have a lot of confidence in.

And yeah, it's definitely not going to be the same on any network, but I think in some ways, we've got to move away from the expectation that is should even be the same. If I'm ever going to watch an adaptation, I want it to be in the same vein and spirit of the original, but distinctively its own as well. The only other series that I can think of that's done that so far is The Office and Battlestar Galactica (the new one is an adaptation in its on right). IDK, I was absolutely opposed to even considering watching the American adapt, but now I think it'll be interesting to at least see what they do with it.

Reply

immortality August 25 2009, 03:22:56 UTC
You brought up a Shot at Love and yeah, it was about 70% hetero and 30% homo, and that was on a good day. So, okay, maybe they're not so shy about heterosexual sex, but . . . yeah.

I don't expect it to be the same. I've never labored under the disillusion that the US!Skins will = UK!Skins. But let's face it, there are much better stations than MTV.

Reply

queengreen August 25 2009, 03:29:56 UTC
Lol, yeah. Hence the lack of confidence about the homo content. (More important, I can't believe I even admitted to have watching that show... damn! There's no taking it back now.) Oh, Dani, how I loved you!

And yeah, I know that you've never been under that misapprehension. I honestly thought back on a brief convo we previously had on the topic when writing this, and I was kind of surprised by how much my stance has changed since then. I do think there are other networks that could do it better (chiefly FX and HBO), but most of them have never ventured into the young adult demographic, so I just figure MTV is the next best option (or at least not the worst).

Reply

puffy_wuffy August 25 2009, 12:49:23 UTC
OMG, you remember Undressed? I thought I was the only one.

Yeah, I'm sure that MTV won't censor sex, drugs, violence or anything, but I'm still scared because they haven't had a good scripted show . . . EVER. Considering that Skins is shot somewhat in a documentary style, MTV . . . probably can't fuck it up too badly?

I'm reserving judgement for later.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up