I...dont mind the narration. There were few clunky lines but I think it's necessary to really get inside Claire's head, and orient the show from her perspective. I also like that there is no Gaelic subtitles, which just adds to this perspective (I hope over time, the subtitles will appear as Claire begins to understand the language).
Thoroughly enjoyed the pilot: considering the fully realised leading lady and the presence of lots of Scottish men this was admittedly a pretty easy feat.
I guess I should have clarified. When I say "wasting his time" I mean "wasting" it on something I don't care about. It's like if Ridley Scott went and did a romantic comedy (which he kinda did), even if it was the best romantic comedy ever I still wouldn't give a shit and would think he was wasting his time. I want Ron Moore to go and do something I love, preferably in the sci-fi genre, and don't you dare post that Helix crap show.
TL;DR I don't care about a time traveling, romance drama. Thus, Ron Moore is wasting his talent to me.
I am plenty of fun. Sheesh, why are some people so upset I don't like a series they like and want the show runner to do something else I like? It also doesn't help the story is just about a bunch of white Scottish people doing white people stuff.
I'm half-joking, but with a story involving time travel the last thing I care about are a bunch of Scots fighting the English in the 18th Century.
I am plenty of fun. Sheesh, why are some people so upset I don't like a series they like and want the show runner to do something else I like? It also doesn't help the story is just about a bunch of white Scottish people doing white people stuff.
I'm half-joking, but with a story involving time travel the last thing I care about are a bunch of Scots fighting the English in the 18th Century.
You don't care about it. That's fine. That doesn't mean that RDM has to cater to your wishes in terms if what some rando on the internet thinks he should be doing. He wants to work on Outlander. He's very passionate about the project. That doesn't mean he's wasting his time.
And anyway, he has two shows on the air and one is a scifi show he's pretty involved in. So.
I am plenty of fun. Sheesh, why are some people so upset I don't like a series they like and want the show runner to do something else I like? It also doesn't help the story is just about a bunch of white Scottish people doing white people stuff.
I'm half-joking, but with a story involving time travel the last thing I care about are a bunch of Scots fighting the English in the 18th Century.
The fact that Outlander is a massive book series success with a large and rabid built-in audience has absolutely nothing to do with Moore taking on this project. Nothing at all.
Haha. I know Ivy has to eat and all, but even if it was the ONLY horror television show of the spring season, you're still better off watching nothing. You literally become stupid watching Helix.
The fact that Outlander is a massive book series success with a large and rabid built-in audience has absolutely nothing to do with Moore taking on this project. Nothing at all.
Haha. I know Ivy has to eat and all, but even if it was the ONLY horror television show of the spring season, you're still better off watching nothing. You literally become stupid watching Helix.
The fact that Outlander is a massive book series success with a large and rabid built-in audience has absolutely nothing to do with Moore taking on this project. Nothing at all.
Haha. I know Ivy has to eat and all, but even if it was the ONLY horror television show of the spring season, you're still better off watching nothing. You literally become stupid watching Helix.
What? I've told Ivy as much before in a TV GAF thread. I have nothing but love for him as a person. It's not his fault the show is terrible. I'm not alone in that perspective. Most of TV GAF gave it a shot, couldn't handle it, and promptly dumped it.
Ivy, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you answer that Helix was a paycheck on your way towards something better? I can try and track down your response but I thought it was along those lines.
You don't care about it. That's fine. That doesn't mean that RDM has to cater to your wishes in terms if what some rando on the internet thinks he should be doing. He wants to work on Outlander. He's very passionate about the project. That doesn't mean he's wasting his time.
And anyway, he has two shows on the air and one is a scifi show he's pretty involved in. So.
Lol, did I say he had to cater to my wishes? I'm merely complaining that he isn't doing anything I like, complaining about shit you can't change is like the main purpose of the internet. However, if you are listening Ron then drop this crap and get HBO to invest in a new space Sci-Fi series of your own creation, you know you want to.
What? I've told Ivy as much before in a TV GAF thread. I have nothing but love for him as a person. It's not his fault the show is terrible. I'm not alone in that perspective. Most of TV GAF gave it a shot, couldn't handle it, and promptly dumped it.
Ivy, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you answer that Helix was a paycheck on your way towards something better? I can try and track down your response but I thought it was along those lines.
A job is still a job and shitting on it in the same thread with someone working on it and including that you know he's employed because of it but "lol helix is absolute shit" is tacky and just rude
Lol, did I say he had to cater to my wishes? I'm merely complaining that he isn't doing anything I like, complaining about shit you can't change is like the main purpose of the internet. However, if you are listening Ron then drop this crap and get HBO to invest in a new space Sci-Fi series of your own creation, you know you want to.
A job is still a job and shitting on it in the same thread with someone working on it and including that you know he's employed because of it but "lol helix is absolute shit" is tacky and just rude
I think Ivy is a great poster and probably an awesome person in real life.
Those two thoughts have literally nothing to do with one another. It's not that complicated. Logic, how does it work?
If I recall correctly, Ivy didn't even join the show until post-season one, which means he didn't even have an influence on how terrible it was. I'm not sure if season two has aired.
I...dont mind the narration. There were few clunky lines but I think it's necessary to really get inside Claire's head, and orient the show from her perspective. I also like that there is no Gaelic subtitles, which just adds to this perspective (I hope over time, the subtitles will appear as Claire begins to understand the language).
I'm very interested to see the ratings here, since I imagine the show did gangbusters by Starz standards. The last subscriber data I could find had them at 21.6 million people, and I'm guessing there's been at least some of an uptick for folks interested in the show.
I...dont mind the narration. There were few clunky lines but I think it's necessary to really get inside Claire's head, and orient the show from her perspective. I also like that there is no Gaelic subtitles, which just adds to this perspective (I hope over time, the subtitles will appear as Claire begins to understand the language).
Thoroughly enjoyed the pilot: considering the fully realised leading lady and the presence of lots of Scottish men this was admittedly a pretty easy feat.
just saw it.
at first i didn't mind the post WWII era kinda reminded me of Downton Abby. I like the atmosphere.
then it went Inuyasha.
So far I'm intrigue. will watch next episode. From time to time I get an itch for romance stuff
A visually stunning show that looks to be RDM's first legit success since BSG and people think he's "wasting his time?"
Seriously?
Based on what I know about the Outlander series (I recently discovered my sister has read the first book and we chatted about it during a lengthy car ride today), the books definitely aren't my cup of tea, but I'm remaining open-minded about the show.
The premiere was great and I'm in for the entire first season no matter what.
I'm on the fence about whether to watch this or not. I think the premise looks very interesting, but I'm not sure I'd like the execution of it. Is it, at its heart, a love story?
For context, my favourite shows are Deadwood, Rome, Game of Thrones, The Wire, Battlestar Galactica (Ron!)... you get the picture.
I don't think having a little narration every week is a bad thing. It could be a problem though if every episode is as narration heavy as the first episode was.
Agreed. White people stuff is so dull: falling in love, riding on horses, fighting, politicking, talking to each other - I've had enough of that on my TV for one year! Starz should really try diversifying their slate a bit - maybe try a series or two with non white characters or something.
I'm very interested to see the ratings here, since I imagine the show did gangbusters by Starz standards. The last subscriber data I could find had them at 21.6 million people, and I'm guessing there's been at least some of an uptick for folks interested in the show.
The latest figures I could find put Starz' subscriber base at 22.9 million.
Spartacus, which is Starz' most successful series to date averaged 1.1-1.2 million (L+SD) viewers per episode over the course of its lifetime. Their more recent shows haven't done nearly as well though, with Da Vinci's Demons averaging around 400-500K (L+SD) per episode and Black Sails sailing in at around 700-800K (L+SD) per episode.
Their most recent series, Power, started low (400-500K L+SD) but built over the course of its season to where the finale earned just over a million viewers (L+SD).
Given how huge the books are, Outlander should have no problem being highest rated Starz series since Spartacus.
I'm on the fence about whether to watch this or not. I think the premise looks very interesting, but I'm not sure I'd like the execution of it. Is it, at its heart, a love story?
For context, my favourite shows are Deadwood, Rome, Game of Thrones, The Wire, Battlestar Galactica (Ron!)... you get the picture.
The latest figures I could find put Starz' subscriber base at 22.9 million.
Spartacus, which is Starz' most successful series to date averaged 1.1-1.2 million (L+SD) viewers per episode over the course of its lifetime. Their more recent shows haven't done nearly as well though, with Da Vinci's Demons averaging around 400-500K (L+SD) per episode and Black Sails sailing in at around 700-800K (L+SD) per episode.
Their most recent series, Power, started low (400-500K L+SD) but built over the course of its season to where the finale earned just over a million viewers (L+SD).
Given how huge the books are, Outlander should have no problem being highest rated Starz series since Spartacus.
Thanks for the numbers. I take it channels like Starz are less concerned with weekly viewership totals, and more interested in any potential impact a show has on total subscription numbers? I realize there's some link between the two. I'm just wondering if a premium channel is less likely to cancel something for low average viewers than a network or basic cable channel.
Can you tell this is our first time subscribing to a non-basic channel?
I just watched the pilot, and despite finding the narration intrusive at times, I quite enjoyed it. Production-wise, it feels much more like a film than a show, and that's a big plus for me.
It seems that it actually is my cup of tea, unlike that Earl Grey nonsense
Watched the premiere. That was excellent. The superb music and cinematography and direction were the standouts, but the main characters and their actors were all very good. And those Scottish accents. <3
The only problem I had, as others here have noted, was the dreadful narration.
*Frank, a historian, blathers on about Scottish history for an entire scene*
Two scenes later:
Frank's passion for history was another reason for choosing the Highlands.
Oh, no shit, Claire?
*Frank immediately and enthusiastically points out and describes a historical landmark*
The bits of narration didn't bother me as much this time. There were only two instances where I internally cringed:
"I've seen this rock" and the accompanying flashback, and the part where she sees Inverness dark instead of lit up with electricity, followed by the "I knew I wasn't in the 20th century anymore." Duh, Claire.
Yeah, one of my biggest TV (and movie) pet peeves is the "let's show a flashback to earlier in the episode." I always shout to the TV (if I'm at home) "I KNOW, I just saw it!"
That said, I really liked the pilot. I didn't expect to -- every time I looked over my wife's shoulder as she has been plowing through the series it seemed like it was a sex scene. I was worried the show would be one long bodice ripper but it seems OK, and the historical hook is strong with me. Plus I know the series goes to
Thanks for the numbers. I take it channels like Starz are less concerned with weekly viewership totals, and more interested in any potential impact a show has on total subscription numbers? I realize there's some link between the two. I'm just wondering if a premium channel is less likely to cancel something for low average viewers than a network or basic cable channel.
Can you tell this is our first time subscribing to a non-basic channel?
Yes, Starz is like HBO and Showtime in that they don't care so much about live numbers as they do about how many people are watching in total (across the various Starz channels, repeats, On Demand, etc.) and how many people subscribe to their package as a result.
Starz tends to give everything two seasons (even very low rated shows), but if a show is low rated and doesn't show growth season to season, and it's not getting, like, buzz or critical acclaim or whatever, then it'll most likely get axed. See: Boss and Magic City.
I just watched the pilot, and despite finding the narration intrusive at times, I quite enjoyed it. Production-wise, it feels much more like a film than a show, and that's a big plus for me.
It seems that it actually is my cup of tea, unlike that Earl Grey nonsense
Yes. As long as you keep in mind that it is a love story at its core.
I don't mind the narration actually. It was a bit awkward in the first episode and I hope it gets better but I think it's important to get into Claire's head.
(I saw the premiere a while ago, but it's nice to not watch things at Comic-Con where there's more of a pomp and circumstance to these things)
I thought it was okay. Terribly slow, and not in a good way, until Claire time travels. The whole episode felt a lot more cohesive after that point (I was getting a bit bored, to be honest). It felt slow for slow's sake, and the relationship between Claire and her husband was solidified very quickly after the first few scenes with them. Dragging it over 38 minutes was overkill, and took away from the meat of the actual show.
The voice over is abominable, and from what I know, is still in the show up until episode 9. Not great. I really hope that it is used more sparingly, because jesus.
Very pretty. Great cast. The opening credits and the #DanceoftheDruids were fantastic. And I'm happy with where the show left off in its last 10 minutes or so -- I'll definitely be tuning in again.
it felt like the womans romance novel version of black knight (the martin lawrence movie)
the production values and actors were pretty good. it's a good looking show. that soundtrack too, when the opening title sequence started
first half bored the piss out of me. but the second half was entertaining. i'll stick with the show for a season but i don't know if this will be my thing. narration is already getting on my nerves.
also main chick got laid like 5 times in one episode haha
