X
- Starz
- Apr 9, 2016
- Starz
- Apr 9, 2016
- Starz
- Apr 9, 2016
- Starz
- Apr 9, 2016
Where to Watch
Season Episodes
View All Seasons
8 Seasons
Top Cast
Metascore
Universal Acclaim
Based on 11 Critic Reviews
85
100% Positive
11 Reviews
11 Reviews
0% Mixed
0 Reviews
0 Reviews
0% Negative
0 Reviews
0 Reviews
Metascore
Universal Acclaim
Based on 11 Critic Reviews
85
100% Positive
11 Reviews
11 Reviews
0% Mixed
0 Reviews
0 Reviews
0% Negative
0 Reviews
0 Reviews
It’s not just well-written and lovely to look at. It’s downright immersive. ... Outlander feels important--even moreso in its second season.
The marvelously textured performances and addictive narrative remain the most compelling reasons to watch Outlander.
User Score
Generally Favorable
Based on 111 User Ratings
8.0
79% Positive
88 Ratings
88 Ratings
9% Mixed
10 Ratings
10 Ratings
12% Negative
13 Ratings
13 Ratings
User Score
Generally Favorable
Based on 111 User Ratings
8.0
79% Positive
88 Ratings
88 Ratings
9% Mixed
10 Ratings
10 Ratings
12% Negative
13 Ratings
13 Ratings
A beautiful love story that keeps you on the edge of your seat . There is magic and drama and plenty of action. I love the plotline, the acting, the costumes and ambiance. Season 1 was probably a bit faster paced in the beginning compared to S2, the parts in France involve little more drama than action, but the plot-lines are interesting and the characters along with their intrigue pull you in. The chemistry between Claire and Jamie doesn't get old and even a guy like me who likes blood and gore more than lovey-dovey scenes was very entertained. This isn't a show for the squeamish, with incredibly close up shots of medical procedures and violence.
Report
SEASON 2
Outlander strikes a rare and unusual balance: It paints with bold colors, and yet it’s true to human complexities that are felt rather than articulated.
Clad in the silks and satins of 1700s France, Outlander‘s Jamie and Claire Fraser clean up nicely. What a relief, then, that the Starz series does, too, delivering a second season that explores their complicated relationship amid a historical plot with a looming, deadly deadline.
It is Balfe, who also received a Globe nomination, whom the series rests on, and she remains a captivating Claire. The actress brings a playfulness and an ethereal presence to the role, which are attributes essential for someone caught between two worlds.compelling drama
here are odd time jumps and plot movements here and there that really prove how much that voiceover narration from Claire is really needed. Not all of these are good things. ... They are not deal-breakers, exactly, but it will be interesting to see if season two can match (or exceed) the lofty achievements of season one. Perhaps the important thing to know is, despite these shifts, Outlander remains as sweeping and addictive as ever, which goes a long way.
Interesting? Yes. But fitfully involving. The intrigues are small, slow-moving, and fuzzy.
I read quite a few negative comments which I don't get at all. I never expected the series to be rainbow and sunshine 24/7. Thr political aspect in season 2 really intrigued me and it didn't disappoint at all. The cast, the acting, the plot... everything perfect as always. Especially "Faith" was probably the best scene I ever saw on any tv show. Caitriona Balfe deserves that Golden Globe!
Report
SEASON 2
I like how they made less episodes for the second season, still the first half of it feels spectacular, yet utterly pointless. It gets better in the end though and as far as I can tell, only better in the next season.
Cliché, agonizing, but also intriguing and adventurous, that's Outlander for me.
I wouldn't watch this season again, though, please shoot me.
Report
SEASON 2
I have talked of my dislike of Sam for 'Jamie and how it ruins this beautifully constructed show. The Sets, costumes, cinematography and editing are all well done and do these lengthy tomes a great service.I assumed, that I would be in a majority as regards my dislike of our 'miscast Jamie' but as I looked around at comments regarding this, found that I was but a small minority. With all the descriptions of Jamie in the book, how you one buy Sam as 'Jamie'? He doesn't have the build as he is nowhere near what one would call a tall man."Taller than most people, with red hair and blue slanted cat eyes " The beauty Deptartment. did not, yet could have easily have, given him "all the colours of red and gold mixed together in tones of copper, cinnamon, auburn, amber, red, roan & rufous" Does Sam Heugan really seem mature beyond his years to you? His accent, if right, would be more like Kevin McKidd's (the Scottish Highlander who plays Owen on Grey's Anatomy) The saddest for me is that Sam does not command the natural authority as 'Jamie' is described. In a room of people, he is but another man. The books describe him as one of those enigmatic people to whom others are drawn and naturally deffer to as a leader. We have all known people like his in our lives; people who don't intentionally but naturally command notice and authority to whom everyone turns to for decision **** lead!. Also, some people can be unfathomably gentle and kind hearted and yet also posses a stature of steely coldness. Sam is the baby brother to these traits for me. believe me, I do not wish to be mean hearted about my convictions, I just cannot fathom why people, such as Diana Gabaldon who wrote the character!, such as the entire crew who cast Sam Heugan, actually believe he possess these traits or can, at least, act them out because he does not. Perhaps once you have known people in real life who are as 'Jamie' is described, in character, you cannot settle for less. What I said earlier, resonates with me: BABY BROTHER. Kevin McKidd who IS a Scottish Highlander and has the right accent but more importantly has the right intensity, authority and gravitational pull although I do think he would have been a bit old..I just cannot watch the show because of the miscasting of "Jamie'. I like Claire but I don't love Claire, our almost as important character. I find her too old. I am truly surprised, NOT that they found casting so difficult but for what they settled for. Brainna looks nothing like her father, is nothing as she is described by Gabaldon and has no redeeming qualities that I can see. The actor who plays Jamie Fraser's sister, the supposedly formidable Jenny Fraser is simply a bad actress. I'll say no more on her. I see shows like "Greys Anatomy' and 'Game of Thrones" and I am wholly confident about the range of skills out there to choose from. Why could they have gotten it SO wrong? HOW could they have cast such an unattractive actor to play the character of John Grey? That was my first impression and it doesn't get any better when discussing his acting. Dougal macKenzie is a good actor but he is NOT "Dougal". This bald, aged man would have been left behind to tend the animals and look after the women folk rather than lead as a war chieftain because in the mid-1700's, you were likely to be physically worn out. Where is our handsome counter to Callum? The tall, curly locked, dark haired brooding, menacing combatant uncle of Jamie's? The Producers had rich descriptions of the primary characteristics of these people. Diana Gabaldon is not shy about hitting us over the head with her vision of each character's defining qualities, their spirit, style, appearance, attributes. It is all written and we've all read it so to see these actors show up on screen is baffling.
Report
SEASON 2
I loved season 1 and really anticipated season 2 however, I have to say I'm quite disappointed. Season 2 is memorable mainly for Claire's **** moments, a never ending string of tears, irrational outbursts and odd behaviour from a WW2 battle hardened veteran in the run up to the war scenes. It's very soap operaish and quite a turn off. The screen time all this crap takes really inhibits growth of the story.
The birth/dead baby scenes are a case in point, woefully done. First off, why is there so much blood? I've only been present at 4 births and I have never seen a doctor, or anyone else, covered in blood up to their elbows. There was no que that the birth was problematic but she appears to have had the baby and then fallen into some sort of coma and awakens into another hysterical scene. We are talking about a nurse who has served in WW2, the death of the baby, though lamentable, is something that trained nurses of the period would not be unfamiliar with.
Far to much melodramatic BS to make this the story it should be, it was hard to sit through many of the episodes.
Report
SEASON 2
A little surprised by how many good reviews there are. I enjoyed most of the first season until the full episode **** scene, but this season just seemed to fall off a cliff in terms of quality. It just seemed too predictable, the acting was ok but the dialog again was predictable and not compelling at all. So bored after the first 2 episodes that there is no incentive to force myself to watch this. Perhaps it would be better if I had read the books.
Report
SEASON 2
