An Outlander Community
Saturday 9:00 PM on Starz


Starz isn't planning on hanging up its kilt just yet, and has renewed its freshman drama Outlander less than a week after the show's premiere, the network announced Friday.

The genre-spanning historical fantasy, which is based on Diana Gabaldon's Outlander series of novels, officially debuted Saturday after a week of multi-platform sampling (read: the pilot was available online and on demand). According to Starz, the first episode surpassed five million views in its first week and drew equal male and female viewership. And while early renewals are generally no big deal to the networkOutlander has all the makings of a hit for the premium cable channel.

Outlander's second season will consist of at least 13 episodes and follow the second book (out of eight) in Gabaldon's saga, Dragonfly in Amber. Meanwhile, the first half of the show's 16-episode first season will conclude Saturday, September 27.

Are you excited for more Outlander?


Previously Aired Episode

AIRED ON 7/9/2016

Season 2 : Episode 13

55 Comments
Comments (55)
Submit
Sort: Latest | Popular
Pilot was this and that, but i think it grows on you.
Reply
Flag
Stop playing COMING THROUGH THR RYE...that's in Ireland. Gwen Proffitt
P.S...I found 2 relatives in 1995...VE week..in Menstrie Village, where I was told that i have the sight. I'm ON the 3rd. read through all of the books.
1
Reply
Flag
Ok just caught up with the series and yes is coming through the rye that is playing, but it's Scottish as it was written by Robert burns
Reply
Flag
It's the sky boat song they keep playing.... Not coming through the rye
Reply
Flag
Wow, that was fast!

Great for them, but incredibly, incredibly fast.
Reply
Flag
Enjoyed the pilot and looking forward to more...
1
Reply
Flag
I find pilot quite boring and was a drag to get through whole hour of it...so I decided to pass on this show.
2
Reply
Flag
Well, I did not dislike or like the episode, I just thought it was a very looong and boring one, I hope there's a lot more action? or excitement? in the second one? because that's the last chance I'm gonna give to the show to got me, and that's a lot to say when I usually give to new shows a four episode chance.
1
Reply
Flag
My husband and I both enjoyed Outlander and are happy it is already Renewed. Neither of us have read the books. We think the casting was spot on, and the cinematography was great.
Reply
Flag
Finally a network that trusts its product and stands by it!
Reply
Flag
This is great news. It took me about 10min in on the pilot to know this was going to be my new tv obsession, much like the books were.
1
Reply
Flag
YES!!!!!!!!
Reply
Flag
It was an incredibly boring pilot so i won't watch another episode.
So i guess the answer to your question is: No i'm not excited that another incredibly boring show gets renewed.
2
Reply
Flag
YAY
Reply
Flag
Industrial language warning in this Scottish take on Outlandish...
http://thejaggythistle.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/all-you-really-need-to-know-about.html
Reply
Flag
I saw the free preview that's available and thought it quite good and gorgeous to look at. One thing that impressed me the most is how they showed Claire's life before the time jump. It's one big flaw of a lot of shows when they barely, if at all, introduce you someone's life before it's turned upside down so you know what it was like before and can better identify with the character's situation. This first episode was a great example of how to do something like that right plus not need to take the whole hour to do it unless it would otherwise be necessary.
4
Reply
Flag
Am I the only one who thinks this guy kinda looks like Sam from Supernatural?

1
Reply
Flag
Yippie!!!!!
2
Reply
Flag
Jackpot!!!!
Reply
Flag
Is it actually worth watching..
3
Reply
Flag
the pilot wasent
Reply
Flag
pfft, i'd have renewed for a third season :p
i love this show. my only concern is that it may ruin my wanting to read the actual books. lets hope it only furthers my interest in the novel series, though
1
Reply
Flag
Read the books!!! they are so great!!! They literally bring you to tears! Starz is sticking true to the books and that's great
Reply
Flag
Damn, wish it wouldn't so much female centric show.
Reply
Flag
Female centric show? So are you angry that the story is told from a woman's point of view or that one of the two main characters is a female?
3
Reply
Flag
The target audience is clearly towards women. I'm not bashing it just it's not for my taste and i really want to watch a decent series like this.
3
Reply
Flag
So in your opinion if a protagonist is a female then the show is clearly targeted towards women? Do I understand you correctly?

Have you ever watched Continuum, Orphan Black or The Lost Girl? Would you say women are main target audience of these shows? Or perhaps their main target are science fiction fans no matter their gender?

If you judge tv show by a gender of protagonist then you clearly miss a lot of fun.
5
Reply
Flag
@DonovanBrown

Yeah, you nailed it and i agree everything you said.
Flag
@DonovanBrown

Perhaps I'm dense, but at least I'm not resorting to name-calling.

As for calling Outlander "sappy romance"- the only thing I can suggest is watching next few episodes - maybe they will change your opinion.
1
Flag
This show is clearly targeted towards women as a sappy romance. The main protagonist being female has nothing to do with that. I can watch Korra, or Game of Thrones which has multiple main female characters. Those shows are not targeting mainly women.

You're being purposefully dense.
2
Flag
Oh i loved Continuum and Lost Girl, they are both great shows. Never missed one episodes both of them.
Flag
This comment has been removed.
Flag
I think it's more about that the show has very noticeably women as target audience. Nothing wrong with that, but it's also not for nothing that the reader audience of romance and/or chicklit novels consist heavily of girls and women.
This Outlander looks to be merely the tv equivalent of that style and genre of books.
Reply
Flag
"Nothing wrong with that, but it's also not for nothing that the reader audience of romance and/or chicklit novels consist heavily of girls and women. This Outlander looks to be merely the tv equivalent of that style and genre of books."


You're very WRONG. Please read some reviews / articles wrote by book fans (or better read the book!) before you classify Outlander as a chicklit novel. It's like saying BSG was a show about robots. We all know it was WAY more then that. Outlander is the same. It's a mix of many genres - romance is only a part of it.
4
Reply
Flag
This comment has been removed.
Flag
This comment has been removed.
Flag
This comment has been removed.
Flag
@KittyKato

I must have misinterpreted your original tone and point. I understand that many readers/viewers are avid fans of romance fiction, and it makes sense that those same readers'/viewers' enthusiasm for Outlander might derive from their love of that plot feature, which forms the central crux around which the adventure story pivots. As such, you're not wrong. Outlander can be easily read/viewed under that generic rubric.

However, the larger point I and, I believe, @Llostris—based on her other posts—are making is that potential viewers of the show who eschew it strictly on the basis that they "don't like romance" are severely short-changing the other aspects of the story that make it exciting for the rest of us that don't typically read/view fiction primarily characterized by its romantic elements. Leaving aside the problems I have with the way fiction is categorized, which I find mostly useless anyway,—consider that the "romance novel" was basically invented as a marketing strategy in the 1970s—I'm particularly troubled by the lop-sided rhetoric that gets thrown around for shows/novels with female protagonists as being "girly," instead of simply "human," and the tendency for critical and fan outlets to choose romance, a literary genre with an overwhelmingly female readership, as the prevailing descriptor for such a generically variable series is symptomatic of that dismissiveness.
More +
1
Flag
@ harpier

I did not reduce the book to nothing more than a romance (although I'm not sure what the heck is wrong with that!). I agree it is also all those other things but for people to be so scathing about other people's summation of the book and the show as a romance is disheartening. If people want to concentrate on the other aspects then fine but don't disparage other people because their preference is to concentrate on the romance. I love Scottish history and love that this particular series of books includes that with the romance.

Despite what anyone tries to do there are a lot of people that will believe this is a romance and judge it on that. Jumping down people's throats telling them they are wrong is not the way to promote something you love IMO.
1
Flag
@KittyKato

@Llostris might be bias in her love of the books, and perhaps willing to grant the TV show unwarranted leeway because of it (though I would be equally likely to argue it would potentially make her a more incisive critic of it as well), but it is definitely "UNFAIR" to reduce the book—jury's still out on the show, though early indications are strong—to nothing more than "romance" and "chick-lit".

You (and many others) may read the books for its central romantic relationship, and motivated by marketing and sales pressures early in its publication history it was sometimes listed as a romance novel, but I (and many others) do not. I am rarely compelled by romantic drama, and it is never the only reason for my appreciation of any work, whether novel or television show. While I think Outlander proves to be a subtle and sophisticated exploration of love and marriage and sex, it's equally a subtle and sophisticated (and sensitive, mostly) exploration of trauma and violation and sadistic impulses to destroy, as well as the less violent forces that break people up. To me, Jamie is not some flawless romantic hero, though I think many read him as such. He's an interesting character, and by no means my favorite in the novel. (Those probably go to Ned Gowan and Outlander's true stand-out couple Janet and Ian Murray.)

But it is a truly white-knuckle political and historical thriller, with as many dark machinations as you could hope for, all seen through the simultanteously oblivious—since she's a complete outsider—and knowledgeable—since she knows her history, which is their future—eyes of protagonist Claire Beauchamp/Randall/Fraser. It has elements of romance, just like it has elements of fantasy, but really it fits more alongside Tudor thriller Wolf Hall by Hilary Mantel or Kieron Gillen's comic mini-series of fourth-century BC Sparta Three than it does alongside The Notebook or Fifty Shades of Grey.
More +
2
Flag
Well, shows like BSG and Star Trek were genre shows as well that had their own core audiences as target. I don't see what's wrong with that. Just like space scifi shows will appeal to some demographic groups more than others, the same applies to romance based shows.
1
Flag
It's possible some restraint and cool water would do me good. However, IMO seeing Outlander as just a romance / chicklit novel is very unfair.
Flag
I'd suggest you try a little restraint. You clearly love the books and the show and you think they are more than just a romance. Fine, however I also love the books (not so much the show yet) and I absolutely agree with the people who say it is a romance. I would not have read the second book if I didn't want to know what was happening with Claire and Jamie. The relationship between Claire and Jamie is the reason I reread the books and wait anxiously for the next one. This view is not WRONG - it's just different to yours.
1
Flag
I really don't think this is the case. As I mentioned in an earlier comment on a previous post, Ron Moore gave an interesting answer to a similar question (from a fan of the books who noted that any guy she'd eventually talked into reading them loved them): How do you think Outlander will be received by male viewers? He said he thought it was similar to Battlestar Galactica, which struggled to get new female viewers, but which retained them when it had them.

Battlestar Galactica was an excellent story told well. Moore's approach to Outlander is the same. It's a ripping historical adventure set among the political machinations of the Scottish clans in 1743, the English military presence always knocking at their door, and on the eve of the Jacobite Rebellions. While I'll admit that there's popular media that caters to the least common denominator popular among women—e.g., sappy romances and shopping—though I insist the same is also true for men—Michael Bay, anyone?—even if it doesn't get as much negative press or condescension, this show ain't that. And I'm happy to see Starz' viewership numbers reflect this.
2
Reply
Flag
At this point, it's hard to tell which way it'll go. It all depends on how the storytelling will be done in the tv show and if there'll be enough aspects that'll appeal outside of the standard expected demographic. Personally, I think that it all depends on where the focus and emphasis will turn out to be.
Flag
As a man I really enjoyed it. I thought the first episode was elegant and charming. I look forward to more.
4
Reply
Flag
This comment has been removed.
Reply
Flag
guys ...

How many seasons will there be ?

there are nine volumes... (it's over ?)

Hopefully in a bit there will be 7 seasons released... (if starz don't screw us on extras again)
3
Reply
Flag
Right now there are 8 books. And as far as I know the saga is not finished.
1
Reply
Flag
Damn! So the boringness is going to be that loooong??? C'mon!
1
Reply
Flag
13 episode order means that Starz is THRILLED with it. Great news. Normally, if they are hesitating they only order 8 episode seasons for Starz. This should be very very good news for fans and the number of those is only going to build as it gets going. (Only other show to get 13 episode order was 'Spartacus: Blood and Sand', the first season.)
4
Reply
Flag
I think this probably has more to do with the pre-existing source material and the economy of filming in a single go. After all, Season 1 is 16 episodes with a three-month break between halves. I wouldn't be surprised, as long as the numbers keep up, if Season 2 is just as long. The books aren't short on action, and it's easier to structure your season if you have a little time to breathe between events.
Reply
Flag
I'm happy!
1
Reply
Flag
All the renewists at Starz are probably ladies and they had such intesive ladyboners after this that they just had to renew it. :)
2
Reply
Flag
or the male renewists have two eyes and ears connected to their hearts! :p
4
Reply
Flag
Not surprising at all. With Outlander Starz have a quality show. Its intriguing, with great acting, a magical atmosphere, well written characters, a beautiful production design, makeup and wardrobe. The show has gotten an 89 on Rotten Tomatoes from critics and has been trending all week on social media. There is a lot of hype!!! That first episode came out weeks ago and people are still watching it. All in all a successful and critically acclaimed show(critics who have watched the first 6 episodes say, it only gets better from the premiere on..). Starz made the right move here and I am excited to see much more of Outlander!
8
Reply
Flag
From here.

"At this point I wouldn't be surprised if Starz announced season 2 in like 3 weeks."

I'm not surprised at all - but I'm INCREDIBLY HAPPY!!!! YAY MORE OUTLANDER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LONG LIVE CLAMIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
3
Reply
Flag
I realize their 'shipper name should probably rhyme with his: Jamie...Clamie. But, every time I see it in print my brain pronounces it "clammy".
2
Reply
Flag
Follow this Show
Members
4,130