Comments on: Which entire cast is going to get dumped?

By: Jacob

Jacob — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 03:48:00 +0000

But if the cast itself is getting bored (and if what Cooke said about Hannah Murray and Mike Bailey leaving the show is true) then it would be better to let them go rather than see the show languish.

By: Raymond

Raymond — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 13:38:00 +0000

While we’re at it, why don’t we get rid of the whole Simpson family from the Simpsons? Because it’s an idea that goes against everything we’ve learnt about viewer loyalty.

We watched friends for Phoebes random songs or Joey’s one liners. And likewise we watch skins for Cassie’s awkwardness or Jal’s abruptness. We don’t watch Skins because it’s set in Bristol.

So no, to fire the entire cast of Skins would be like removing the Seinfeld from Seinfeld – its just wrong.

By: Luke (sexyer1)

Luke (sexyer1) — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:11:00 +0000

too soon.

Sign the petition to attempt to stop it: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/saveskinscast/

E4′s Skins website: http://www.e4.com/skins/

By: Jacob

Jacob — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 07:37:00 +0000

Fire At Will is spot on.

Meanwhile, hurry up SBS and get the second series on the air!

By: Cooke, actually.

Cooke, actually. — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 06:22:00 +0000

Personally, I think it's a wonderful idea. Skins is a fantastic show, but it's the kind of show that wouldn't work at all with an older cast (and it was already confirmed that Mike Bailey and Hannah Murray were leaving the series anyway).

It's cutting-edge, it's youth-focused and, like any show that tackles big issues, it relies almost entirely on the suspension of disbelief. How many viewers would believe that three seasons' worth of 'extreme' events could happen to the same group of characters?

The events would either get more and more sensational (like a soap opera), or they'd start treading over old ground. Basically, it'd either get stupid or stale.

So instead of risking a winning formula, they're searching for a new formula entirely.

Brilliant move.

By: Dr_Rudi

Dr_Rudi — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 23:20:00 +0000

This might actually be a good thing for the actors. Instead of six to eight actors getting the experience of a television series (and getting stuck, or losing interest and leaving), 12 or more young actors will have that experience. (It it works). That has to be a good thing. (and I loved Skins).

By: Gaijin

Gaijin — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 22:40:00 +0000

That’s an interesting move, thanks for the news David. I have really enjoyed the Skins fresh, in your face approach to teen drama. I’ve really liked what they have to offer so far. I guess this is the answer to: What do you do when the network wants more episodes but you’re out of story ideas… Answer replace the whole cast!

By: neonkitten

neonkitten — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 14:10:00 +0000

That redefines RISKY.

In the second season we’re still getting to properly know many of the characters, and to have them summarily dismissed is almost an insult to the viewers (let alone to the actors playing the roles – come on Brian, don’t put Hannah Murray out of work!

As for the “team” of writers, Elsley should stick to writing the show himself. His scripts are easily the strongest.

Brilliant show, anyway. Hope they don’t screw it up.

By: gaptooth

gaptooth — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 13:52:00 +0000

what the? is this for real?

By: fire_at_will

fire_at_will — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 13:38:00 +0000

Ok, so i love watching Skins, but is that really necessary?

I get they're doing the whole "let's be totally different", and that works well with the different characters for each episode, but isn't half the reason people watch drama series on television is so they can get invested in the characters? I know i certainly do.

It'll be interesting to see if they can pull it off.