I heard in the U.K it is about to go on its 6th season. Why were the ratings so low in the U.S? Granted, I watched this show and thought it was stupid. However, I did know that in the U.K it was quite popular.
I wonder what the different in the U.S. is?
too sensitive maybe?
I'm too cool for a signature bitches!
Well, at first, everyone hated it because it was too similar to the UK version. Then, later on, everyone hated it because it had strayed away from the UK version.
I like both version; however, I like the UK version more. It has a lot to do with Nicholas Hoult, and the fact that Tea/Tony was perfect...and look how that ended...
I wonder if season two would have seen them together.
http://www.youtube.com/user/PinkCarnationProDux
Skins was cancelled for multiple reasons. Lack of audience, lack of fund (due the lack of audience), and that small but vocal group who opposed. But that small group had a point the writers listened to.
Here is the thing about Skins. The UK version was good because it was so raunchy. The open sex, drugs, and partying was what hooked A LOT of teenagers. The US can not show the things they did on air, so scripts had to be changed quite a bit. And had it been adults having open sex, doing drugs, and partying they could have slapped it on HBO and ran with it. But the cast and characters were minors and we don't allow minors naked to half naked on air. In the UK 16 is legal age for most things so it's completely legit for them to get half naked on tv and still be in high school.
Yes, Skins American version is horrible. But you can blame it on the law. And because it is horrible it had no viewers.
It doesn't even feel like it takes place in America to begin with. Who cares anyway? Way better and funnier shows have been made in the US.
shareI don't think it was cancelled because parents were too sensitive or because Americans are more conservative or whatever. In fact, if you compare the UK and US versions, the US version is far more tame and yet the original UK version is still more favorable because it was just better. The acting is superb, the story is great as is the writing. The actors in the US version were just awful. The actors were awful and it was jsut a disaster. I admit I could only stand to watch the first two episodes, but I can't imagine it got much better.
It was cancelled because there were no viewers. Shows get cancelled when their ratings aren't high enough meaning not enough people are watching to keep the show on air. People watch the Secret Life and so that stays on (Only God know why people watch it though). People didn't keep watching Skins so it was cancelled.
Well one factor was PTC
http://www.parentstv.org/
Nothing changes in america does it? America stays in its embryoic sac don't they?
rosie85angel-1
yet the original UK version is still more favorable because it was just better. The acting is superb, the story is great as is the writing. The actors in the US version were just awful. The actors were awful and it was jsut a disaster. I admit I could only stand to watch the first two episodes, but I can't imagine it got much better.
rosie the reason the British version was better was because they had the orginal cast and they showed it how it really was. But then they made a new cast each year and finally
It was cancelled because there were no viewers. Shows get cancelled when their ratings aren't high enough meaning not enough people are watching to keep the show on air. People watch the Secret Life and so that stays on (Only God know why people watch it though). People didn't keep watching Skins so it was cancelled.
this british crap fest is cancelled too!
Thank god! But they had to drag Skins UK in the mud for several seasons!
I think it had to do with the way the US version was marketed. They went on and on about how much sexual content there was in thwe show and proudly proclaimed they were casting real teens in the roles. Right away they put their foot in it on that one AND thats the only way I really remember it being advertised - a controversial show, REAL teens in sex acts without actually saying what the show was about. If they had advertised the show more towards what the show was about rather than the controvery of it being aired in the US maybe things would be different.
I watched both series and the main difference is that the UK version is more light hearted in a way. Yes there is sex, drugs and violence but the UK version seemed more realistic and developed in a way that their flaws made sense.in that the teens were not just sterotypes, their characters were developed so that they were more than just teens o a show who have sex, do drugs and get into fights.
The US version just showed a bunch of kids who seemed bored of their lives already and had nothing better to do. The US version was darker in that it made it seem like there was no hope for the future and that this was just the way ALL teens are. Not every teen acts in that manner and I beleive the UK version showed more understanding of this.
The character of Jal - not sure of the US name - in the UK version it made mroe sense for her to be included in the group. The US character seemed like an extra character that they did not know how to blend her into the group or even why she would be friends with any of them.
I beleive the reason it failed in the US was because they tried to go too shock value with it and ended up not developing the characters in the way the UK version And also instead fo rehashing the storyline for Skins UK season one, they shoudl have created characters unique to the US version so they weren't stuck trying to make the actors recreate characters already developed by other actors.