MovieChat Forums > Outlander (2014) Discussion > Got 30 minutes in to first episode, turn...

Got 30 minutes in to first episode, turned it off.


A) Not much of a plot. Boring.

B) Couldn't stand the 'at your service' and then one minute later shoving a sword by her throat and grabbing her by the hair.

Nope.

reply

Good for you! I was visiting relatives over the summer and they were just raving about it, then turned on the first episode to introduce me to the show. I was trying to be polite by staying in the room to watch it, but I thought it was terrible. And I generally love historical-type romances.

reply

I gave Outlander a second chance. I didn't make it to halfway through the second episode, again. It really is awful.

reply

A vehicle like this that's based on a series of novels take a bit more time to develop, and for the audience to appreciate. It's current rating on IMDb is 8.4 so someone must be appreciating it.

reply

I like the show, but I'm fan of time travel plots, have a huge interest in Scotland and enjoy history.

I'll warn that the show is very violent.

reply

Read the books first, then the show will make more sense.

reply

Is she a loud mouth modern woman in the books too?

reply

She was actually more subdued in the books. But keep in mind, the books were written in first-person narrative with her voice. She was feisty at times, but not as loud as she was in the show. Jamie was almost spot-on, but a few times the author wrote him as almost being like a superhero. In fact, there were times when he did way more daring stuff than in the show.

A lot of people just enjoy watching it for the chemistry between Jamie and Claire, particularly the sex scenes and the humor. Sometimes the fight scenes during the Scottish rebellion are interesting for those who love historical war films. Many women watched the show for the costumes....at least until after Season 3. The Scots watched it because they got excited about something being filmed in their homeland with actual Scottish actors included, and actual research being done on that country in the 18th century. They even had some of the actors re-wearing kilts from "Braveheart!"

What annoyed me was, they left out some of the best scenes from the books! Particularly two funny ones that took place in Paris.

A common issue everyone actually has with the series is, the stories were very strong and fun for the first two books, but they got really boring after that, particularly when Claire was reunited with Jamie after 20 years in the future (after the Scottish rebellion) and she and him go off to America. Then it just turns into another series of American Colonial adventures, soooo mundane for those of us who had to hear about it over and over again in school and in literature. Some people like the books still, but you'd have to be fascinated by American colonial life in the 1700s, and frankly, once you've read one Revolutionary War story, you've read them all.

reply

That's good to know for a woman who was supposed to be from 1940's England she just never felt right in the show. Jamie would be a hero type though, that is realistic for the period.

I liked the chemistry, the history and time travel angle etc too especially the Scotland setting which is a less used than other time periods.

Not sure which season it was but they really started to lose me when she walks about singing Boogie Woogie Bugle Boy, sorry but as if her usual behaviour wasn't enough to have her burnt at the stake walking about saying "Boogie Woogie" definitely would have her accused of witchery. It was just a jump the shark moment for me.

In the end I stopped watching when Jamie was going to be raped by the English Officer, it had become rather rape and torture porn for me by then.

I saw that they end up in Colonial America, I can understand you being as bored by that as I too would be bored if they went to Colonial Australia something I had to endure hearing about in school over and over again.

It probably wouldn't have mattered where or when they travelled to as I am sure it would be the same story over and over anyway. Claire shoots her mouth off, Jamie pays for it, rinse and repeat...

reply

I'm afraid there are at least three major rape scenes in the series, and they have shocking, lasting after-effects on the story. One was of Jamie by Black Jack Randall (very hard to watch, which shows you how good the actors were, and how sick Diana Gabaldon could be as a writer); one was in Paris of a sweet young lady that Claire was friends with; and one was Claire's daughter in the colonies at least two seasons later, though Brianna got revenge on the guy who did it.

What's really moving is how Claire convinces Jamie to keep on living after the violation, because after they rescue him, he wants to die, rather than face the humiliation and shame and having to live with the memories. He also thought Claire wouldn't love him after that. She not only told him she loved him, but she would fight to keep him alive, and it was a very pivotal scene in the story. While Jamie struggled with PTSD in Paris after that, he and Claire did eventually go back to having a healthy relationship, and he was even able to help others who had been hurt like that in later parts of the series.

A fine example of this was, Jamie was put in prison for dueling illegally to settle a score with Randall, and Claire had to go to the King and offer her body in exchange for Jamie's freedom. It worked, but not exactly the way anyone expects ;) There's an interesting service the King asks her to perform involving two men having to take part in what Claire calls a "sorcerer's duel" before the king [while doing a very poor job] has his way with her. Jamie totally understood when Claire told him afterwards how she got him out of prison and didn't hate her for it.

reply

I stopped watching The Walking Dead for a similar reason, things just got too dark and gruesome, perhaps too hopeless or whatever I don't know but watching people suffer like that doesn't make for enjoyable viewing.

I think I may have seen some of the aftermath, what you wrote about Claire offering her body rings a bell. For me that was another part of the series, she uses sex a lot to get herself out of problems. I know it's all a fantasy but if I were Jamie I would be thinking "I have been violated by a man and want to die and now my woman cuckolds me thinking this will help!"

I always felt for Jamie and I think his life would have been better if he never met Claire.

reply

I thought that cliche she used when the king was plowing her; "I closed my eyes and thought of England," was sooooo dumb. She never said that in the book, and it's been used so many times in British tv shows and literature (usually the adult-oriented kind) that it made us all groan while watching.

Usually it's a phrase a British Nobleman tells the wife who doesn't love him (it was a business arrangement between families) to do that while they're having sex to produce heirs. Either that, or it's a joke for women married to men they don't like, but have to have sex with to keep him happy and her in a comfortable home and lifestyle.

What really happened was (in the book), Claire wore the infamous red dress, went to see the king, had to mediate the duel between the little frog-like wizard and the asshole Count, the wizard gets a fake poison, the Count gets a real one and croaks, the wizard leaves, the count's body gets cleared out, and the king did a quickie with Claire because his mistress was waiting in her bedchamber down the hall. They barely even removed any clothing.

To be fair, after a while of reading, it seemed almost like every time Jamie and Claire were together, their lives became chaotic and trouble was drawn to them like a magnet. Whereas, things were quieter when they weren't together.

I personally wouldn't marry a man who had belted me for "disobeying him," but then again, I wouldn't have tried escaping at that specific time that Claire did when she tried to go home. She was an idiot, running off like that. Despite her intelligence about a lot of things, sometimes Claire would do something really stupid.

reply

From what I have found online that phrase wasn't documented until 1912 https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/close-your-eyes-and-think-of-england.html so although it is fair that Claire would be aware of it, it would hardly mean anything to the people of Scotland at the time she is in. And yes it is groan inducing.

Speaking of Claire removing her clothing that was part of the humour when I started watching the show, she was naked every episode from memory and multiple times per ep!

I can only go by the TV series and it seems Claire even in her WW2 home era was prone to chaos, if I recall correctly she was not all that in love with her husband? Maybe I am getting that wrong. She certainly didn't have any problems cavorting with Jamie. Jamie would probably be happy tending a farm somewhere with a nice quiet wife and growing crops!

Claire is extremely emotional I agree and not as smart as we are supposed to think she is.

reply

Claire was not naked all the time. It's just those scenes stand out to people more than the scenes where she was clothed.

The problem with Claire's relationship with Frank was, she first fell in love with him quickly before the war. If she hadn't gone time-traveling, I think the two of them would have had an okay life together, but they could have easily had a falling out too. It wasn't unusual for people to have married in haste during WWII, only to find out that when their new spouse was actually home and in a peaceful setting, that they actually weren't that great of a person. It's like a more extreme version of leaving the "honeymoon phase." The trouble was, divorce was difficult to get and discouraged in the 50s, so often people stayed in bad marriage for a long time, due to public opinion and the kids, like what Claire and Frank did.

However, going back in time caused Claire not only to be traumatized by an indirect ancestor of Frank's that looked exactly like him, but she found her true soulmate in Jamie, and honestly, after being with Jamie, Frank didn't stand a chance. It would be like comparing Adonis to Pinocchio.

(Claire found out later on that her first husband was actually descended from Black Jack Randall's younger brother, not the man himself. She was fooled for a long time due to an error in historical records, gaps in the historical records, and the fact that he looked exactly like her husband, despite living 200 years ago).

reply

I lasted a few seasons. The main character is supposed to be from the 1940’s but acts like a modern woman and would have been burned as a witch in the 17th century Scotland. Her male companion in historical Scotland also suffers for her big mouth. It eventually started getting more
rape and torture porn.

reply

Wasn't capital punishment (i.e. burning) for witchcraft repealed in 1735 by the Witchcraft Act? I thought one year's imprisonment was the maximum punishment allowed after that.

reply

Ok but they still would still throw things at her.

reply