Does London System take skill or any theory? what do you think

London System has a lot of theory. Beginners mostly use it to either avoid theory while developing safer than many other openings.

Obviously they miss out a lot of subtleties they miss out, but punishing them requires a lot of skill.

It takes skill to play well. Most of the time, people play the London System because they are not skilled and expect an easy solution to chess. This comes in the form of a "system" which can be played against anything without having to think.

I find the Alapin System dry and drawish in the Sicilian; similar execution to the London System.

Alapin and London are basically equal openings that beginners play because they don't want to learn anything.

London system is an opening that brings you to the middlegame to play chess rather than to achieve a theoretical battle. It's popularity nowadays means that there is significant london theory.

However, it is still an opening that largely relies on your actual chess skill. I have great respect for players who play the london at higher levels, since it means they are good at the game.

It isn't popular with newer players and hated by higher level players.

Kamsky, Dubov, Xiong, and Aronian, all very strong grandmasters, all have more than 100 games in the London System, and Kamsky has over 350. And the London is more often played by players in the 1200-1400 range afaik than by new players.

It takes skill to play WELL, but like every other opening it takes no skill to play poorly.

Annoying depends on your tastes. Personally I dislike the Owen's/Czech Pirc/Small Center Pirc far more than the London as they're far, far, far more common at my rating band but share the same stereotypical 'passive premoved system' play.

Magnus Carlsen plays and wins with London System against some of the best players in the world...

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=magnus+carlsen+london+system+chess+games+

playing the london system well takes some skill, as you must recognize when to deviate from the entire set up. For example, if black plays too passive, white may benefit from playing c4 or even early nc3 instead of c3. in other cases, white should consider qf3 instead of nf3. in others, white may opt for an early e4, or 0-0-0 or even h3-g4. 
having said that, even with that flexibility in mind, its still far less taxing than most rich openings.

Perfect plug opportunity:

https://www.chess.com/blog/alphaous/why-the-london-system-is-actually-excting

Of course there is plenty of theory in the London system, with many subtle move-orders. To play it really well requires skill and understanding. In that way it is identical to every other common opening. At the club level, most players don't know the theory or understand any of the mover-order choices. In that way it is identical to every other common opening.

But it is more often that players are taught that they can play the same set of moves every game in the London and believe that they are fine while they are actually slightly worse. That is, they see the London as a shortcut to playing good chess as they feel safe playing the same moves while not actually learning anything.

Other (non-system) openings are more confrontational in nature so you can't play the same moves every game, but you are fighting for an advantage. You are driven to learn and improve by the confrontational nature of these other openings, like Queen's Gambit and Ruy Lopez.

No competent chess teacher or coach will teach that you can or should play the same moves every game in the London System. That is simply not a true statement.

Emphasis on the competent part.

It absolutely is true. The London is promoted to beginners as an easy opening which you can play the exact same way against anything. Doesn't matter what opponent does, every game they are going to play d4-Bf4-e3-c3-Nf3-Nd2. That is the purpose of the London.

That's pure nonsense.

It's not. They basically are told "Ruy Lopez, Queen's Gambit or Sicilian, that's all too difficult to understand for a beginner like you. Just play the London. All you have to do is play these moves every game and it will make chess easy for you."

You don't know what you are talking about. Name a well-known chess teacher who teaches what you are asserting regarding the London System. That is, that you can play the same moves in the same sequence regardless of the moves your opponent plays.

It's promoted as a shortcut for chess. Instead of having to actually learn anything about those other openings, which are too much for our simple, lower rated brains, we are told to just play the London "system".

It's in the title. The point of a system is that you play the same moves against anything.

You don't have to learn or think about opening ideas and principles or fighting for the centre when you can just play the same set of 6-7 moves all the time. That's the point of the opening.

Yes I do, this is what Gothamchess promotes as he always says these other openings are way too difficult for beginners so just play the London system every game or some garbage gambit.