As I begin writing this, treading into the murky waters of potentially pissing off the production, especially Matt, possibly Terry, maybe Maril? I think about Oprah’s words at the Golden Globes…”What I know for sure, is that speaking your truth is the most powerful tool we all have.” So, I’ll say this: it’s never my intention to piss off the production team, whom I admire so much. What I offer comes from a place of support, always.
And Maril has said…
as long as the critiques are respectful it's all good
— Maril Davis (@TallShipProds) July 11, 2016
Why do I feel compelled to speak up? Because I care. I care about Outlander and everything that surrounds it, including the people, the process, and the product.
When I interviewed Caitriona last September at the NYC Season 3 premiere in New York City, I asked her what advice 40-something-year-old Claire would give to present day Caitriona, and she said (and I quote) “I think Claire would just tell anybody to be very true to yourself and to stand up for yourself… she’s definitely given me a voice, or made me listen to my own voice a little bit more, which is great.”
In this piece, I am amplifying the many voices that sprang up from a simple Easter/Passover greeting that I sent out, with a video. I came across the trailer for the second half of Season 1, and it struck me – the theme of waiting – waiting for Christ to rise from the dead, for Moses to part the Red Sea and free the slaves, and waiting for Jamie and Claire’s story – a story described by the author herself, as Jamie’s story as told by Claire, to continue.
The first comment I received was a concern about the Season 4 teaser which was released in December of 2017. I usually don’t watch the trailers, because I am among the few who like to be totally surprised by the costumes, sets, and plot changes in each new season, when it arrives. But, I did watch this one, after the comments came rolling in.
Here is that trailer…
“I was thinking back to your letter to Ron some time ago commenting on Jaimie’s character in the series. Why is it that we find the books so compelling, but the series… the 1st season was outstanding, as the recap of Season 1 you just included proves, and the first half of the 3rd season rang true, – Sam was outstanding, but the second half just was not… I can’t put my finger on it. The books, all 8 of them, continue to draw us into the characters, their lives, their passions, their integrity. We love and admire both Claire and Jamie. The books are so much more than a rip-rousing story and history come alive… they are a journey into the soul of a relationship/ a marriage, between two people who are each other’s EQUAL and whose strengths compliment each other and I just didn’t feel that in the 2nd half of the 3rd season. To me, Jamie did not come across as worthy of Claire’s heart wrenching, irrevocable decision to go back in time to him. His actions were, for the most part, similar in book and series, but his character seemed immature, driven too often just by emotion…and his lying and pettiness (I’m sure that scene where he shows no concern about continuing to live in a brothel despite Claire’s objections was NOT in the book – please tell me it wasn’t) seemed to use up so much more air in season three than in Voyager… What’s happening?
….The series is still wonderful, but it could be SO much more… and the clip they’ve shown us so far from Season 4 has me quite worried. She’s telling him about the American dream and he looks up at her sort of doe-eyed (she comes across as the wise older woman/ teacher/mother and he almost her child) and asks if that’s how it will be like for them (I forget the exact lines) and I just found myself wanting to throw something at the screen because that’s NOT how I think our Jamie would behave. He is sexy and strong, yes, but also smart and educated and PROUD and honorable and his own person, and I WISH they would stop painting her as emotionally and intellectually stronger and more honorable than he is.” —Piper.
“…I saw a tweet a while ago to Matt Roberts from a fan. She asked how many more times will Claire be given Jamie’s lines in Season 4 and so on. He was not happy about the comment. I however felt she spoke for many of us fans of the books and the series.
They have definitely diluted Jamie’s character in order to promote the stronger message of the lady being the lead character instead of portraying the couple as equals as Diana intended.
I love Balfe and her acting has grown throughout the series but this is not just her show.
That small snippet of the trailer from S4 with Jamie asking Claire about how things would be in America; was typical of making Jamie look like a love sick, awe struck adolescent, rather than the intelligent Alpha male that he is.
I love the books and enjoy the series greatly, especially the amazing designs both in scenery and costumes but would dearly love them to equalise the main couple as they are meant to be and thus deliver an even more appreciated impressive show.” —Yvonne
“…I am in agreement that unfortunately the role of Jamie has been diminished – that he is a follower – a reactor to everything around him. Jamie that we know in the books – is a leader, a soldier, an educated, travelled and strong minded yet stubborn man, a man who knows his self-worth. My question is why did they change that?
I feel that Sam Heughan, though I have never met him, is a great actor but I feel that he has been made, unfortunately, to look like an “younger brother/child” to Claire. As a Highlander from the 1740’s Jamie would have been more stronger in nature, someone Claire would definitely look up to which she did – as, if you have read the books, she always safe and secure with him. They had their little spats occasionally, what married couple doesn’t, but their love for each other grew stronger all the time. This has been almost diminished as the Outlander series has progressed.” —Rhona
“Ron Moore has said several times in interviews during the first year, that he sees this as a story about a strong woman… Thus the ‘seconding’ of Jamie. I agree that the books are the story of “JAMIE AND CLAIRE” together, one soul, for one without the other is only half the story. And this is NOT what comes through on the screen, at least not since the first season. I think for whatever reason, they interpret the books as a story “…about a fiesty woman”. I get that a book doesn’t ‘just’ translate to the screen… My obsession has slowly dwindled as the show has moved farther away from the soul of the book. I will continue to watch for now, but no guarantee for how long… —Rachel
The S4 trailer is as Piper described. I thought it was my imagination. Also, when they landed on the beach in Georgia, it appeared that he was befuddled ( as an educated man, he would know Georgia was a Colony) and it was Claire who was thinking clearly… and she had just recovered from unconsciousness! …Claire recognizing Jamie’s strength, solid judgement and integrity (and vis versa) is the center pillar of the books, story and characters. Claire states her respect of him MANY times, and defers to him or ensures they share decision-making. We’re all believers that men and women are equal. One’s strength (Claire, in this case) should not diminish the other’s (Jamie) – and vis versa. This is the essence of the entire story. —Nadine
“After season 1, I have commented on many occasions that it’s like feminism has taken hold and the writers/directors seem hell bent on making Claire appear a “Superwoman” even giving her some of Jamie’s parts/words…this reduces/relegates Jamie to a subservient position which I have never found in the books. SH is a very good actor and I don’t enjoy seeing him have to portray JAMMF like this. Yes, Claire is a strong (20th Century raised) woman but she wouldn’t survive in the 1700s without him; her demeanour would soon land her in trouble..in fact it is said just so later in the books…” —Sherenne
“My husband has not read the Outlander series, and as he has watched the show he has observed that Jamie’s character as a man is being slighted/sidelined. He becomes impatient with Claire and told me that the way they are being written makes him want to read the books to see how Diana actually portrays them….”
—Nan
It seems that Sam himself feels this effect, based on his comments about Season 4 in this recent interview… (thank you Ursula)
In an early(ish) interview between Robert Licuria (who I like very much, by the way), and Caitriona (who I also like very much), Rob said “I think the genius of Outlander is that it appeals to women who feel disenfranchised in a male world.” I remember thinking that that summary definitely missed the mark for me. But, he articulated very well what seems like a primary driver for the show, both in choices about writing and what scenes get left in or edited out of the final product. In the visual adaptation, I would even say that Jamie’s character (certainly), and Jamie and Claire’s relationship both play second fiddle to this driving theme. I think this is what feels like an ill fitting piece of clothing to those of us who believe that both lead characters and their relationship are the true core of the story.
As I’ve said before, this is a major theme in our culture right now. As women are being uplifted (as they should be), I’ve noticed a trend for men to be portrayed as “less than.” I can see the confusion in many boys and men around me as people try to understand their places, and I think we see this play out in Jamie’s character.
If you happened to watch Oprah’s speech at the Golden Globes, you may have seen the elated reaction by the men when she INCLUDED them as being phenomenal, and part of the solution vs lumping them all together as the problem, and this is a very powerful woman speaking. Clip from Oprah’s GG Speech
Dearest Producers, please dare to celebrate a fully actualized, mature, male heroic character who is the equal of the heroine in your show (and our beloved story). Dare to be leaders in our culture and in our media, by elevating both lead characters.
And Dearest readers, if you choose to become involved in this discussion, please take a moment to consider the feelings of the people involved, who have worked tirelessly for literally years to bring our favorite book series to life. Thank you.
I totally agree with you. It struck me as odd that Jamie was put in the position to be a toddler to Clare’s wise older woman.
It seemed wrong somehow and I hope Jamie will get on equal footing in the future season
I guess now we know why Sam has not received the awards and nomination as Cait has. It has been more than noticeable that Cait as Claire runs the show in always having more notable lines and situations that seem to make Sam as Jamie just following her lead. I think it is intentional but not sure why.
That’s it!! I always wondered why Sam didn’t get any great awards, but I’m worried how they changed his role. This is not the Jamie we know and love. I don’t like that Claire seems to be the main person (I really love Catriona). What have they done with this strong Scottish man?
I was beginning to think it was just me being impatient, waiting for the real Jamie to wake up and get back down to the business of being the strong (, a bit impetuous ) but essentially wise Scotsman we know. Watching him being sidelined is painful and it’s diminishing Sam’s talent and his shot at recognition for it
This is not the Jamie that we know and this is NOT the Claire we know. Claire is my fav character but this new Claire Is nothing like the S1 Claire or even S2. Won’t start talking or comparing about and with book Claire. Just show. And this show Claire is not the Claire I, as a viewer n fan, love , respect n understand. I understand the changes… 29 years apart etcbut this fact has nothing to do with the change.
I feel they have taken out the passion between Claire and Jamie. I know it’s not all about sex. But it’s missing! Are they insinuating that older couples ( in their 40’s and 50’s ) don’t have sex anymore? What a great disservice to women and men and to the books! Season 4 is a huge disappointment in every way. And I just won’t go into the disappointment in casting Brianna’s character. How did they drop the ball so badly there.
Caitriona is completely deserving of every nomination and win she receives IMO!!
That i agree with. I am appalled at the comments bashing her. Sam would be appalled also.
I don’t think anyone is bashing CB! I think most of these comments are for bringing the character of JAMMF back to the equally strong male character he is in the books, as DG wrote him, and how he was portrayed in S1!! Claire would NOT have been attracted to an immature, unsure boy as Jamie has been relegated after the confrontation in S3! Claire & Jamie are equally strong characters as written in the novels! The feminist point of view of 2018 has no place in 1760’s colonial time period! A strong female Claire, yes, as she was written in the novels! That Claire would NOT have been attracted to the diminished male that he is written as in S4 that we saw at the end of S3!!
Please bring back the equally strong character of JAMMF we saw in the novels…Let Claire & Jamie be those characters that comlimented each other so wonderfully come back!
With respect, TJH
This IS why SH has not received the recognition he so richly deserves foe playing this strong male lead in OL the series!! Yes, CB deserves her recognition for her work portraying Claire! Definately, she does! Only stating that SH deserves equal recognition for the incredible work this consummate, stage trained actor
My comment from 1st post are turned around! The end of my comments were turned around! Please excuse them! Tried to go back & edit them w/o success!
Should have read…
CB definately deserved all the recognition she has received! At the same time, SH deserved equal recognition for his body of work in OL as well!! He is a consummate, stage trained actor who is well honed in his craft, who used every part of himself in bringing the agony, pain & desperate need of his character to the screen sometimes without speaking a word! The reason he has not is because his character has been relegated to supporting actor level instead of male lead!!!
These comments take nothing away from CB and her body of work!
Blessings!
It’s intentional because Sam cannot deliver them appropriately. Notice how many scenes he had without dialogue, or very little. And the camera moves off him quickly. The other actors ALWAYS carry the scenes with him. Not just Caitriona. When he has long lines like Turtle Soup it sounds horribly fake.
Mille~Perhaps he could ‘deliver them appropriately’ (how insulting) if they actually were true to the book and wrote Jamie’s lines in the script?
The writers are taking Dianas dialogue for Sam/Jamie and cut and pasting it into Claire/Caits script. It’s the writers once again that are lifting the great lines that belong to Jamie and giving that strength and leadership role to Claire.
Agreed! Sam Heughan had not grown as an actor and is just not able to handle much of the dialogue. I’ve felt from S1 that he’s the weaker player in scenes with very talented actors.
I didn’t read the books until after watching S1, but I’ve since read everything Gabaldon had written. Generally. I think casting choices have been great…with the two glaring exceptions of Sam Heughan and Sophie Skelton. I just wish they’d consider replacing them, esp. since their storylines become so much more complex.
I also felt the changes you talk about in your writing but had difficulty putting my finger on what was not right for a while and did not feel that Jamie was the person on film that was in the books now that I have read your description it fits in perfectly with what you have written.
I am upset that Claire has all the adulation and comes across as bossy and perfect and Jamie a fool. I did not feel comfortable after about episode 8 of season 3 and still find it difficult watching on DVD. I too am concerned for season 4 and fear that Jamie will not be the strong King of Men that we know him to be.
Please tell me there isn’t anymore torture to Jamie after series 1 I couldn’t watch it again it’s too traumatic unnecessary too
Love this drama but hate the torture scenes too much to watch
I agree totally! I really hated the season 4 trailer in every way. She looks much older, he’s sitting below her like her child. It’s actually uncomfortable to watch. I’ve read the series several times, and the thought of them diluting Jaime to make this show more “feminist “ based is ridiculous. The fans love the Jaime from the book and he should be true to the character. And BTW, don’t get me wrong I love Claire ($ the way Cait plays her!) but they are equally strong people and Jaime shouldn’t be “dumbed down”!!!! I love this show but am worried about season 4.
I agree. Its like they’ve lost their connection with each other also (Clair & Jamie). I sensed distance between them the entire time during season 4.
I was extremely disappointed in season 4. And the filmography did not seem the same quality as in the past. Jamie’s lines needed to be much better written, to the level of talent he is capable of. Not doing that was demeaning for the shows integrity, and was very frustrating to watch.
Jamie is the alpha male in the books and Sam is certainly up to the role…please, Diana, or whoever can, get this straightened out. Claire is just learning to make it day be day while Jamie takes the leadership role for the ENTIRE FAMILY! Fight for Jamie, Sam and Cait!
You all ALMOST have it, but are BLINDED by your infatuation with Sam. He’s just not a good actor. He looked immature in the clip because he IS immature. He can not convey an intelligent Jamie. It’s shocking to see such acting in a major production. That’s why he’s not getting the awards. That’s why the camera focused on other actors. And unfortunately his daughter is exactly the same. Hope they concentrate on all the other characters next season or it will be another scary soap opera.
Dear Millie- you’ve written several comments here saying Sam is a bad actor. You are basically a troll.
Sam is an excellent actor- especially when he is given good material. And I don’t say this because I have an “infatuation” with him (when you say this you are basically insulting all the fans who admire him).
His role at the end of season 1 was some of the most difficult acting I’ve ever seen in my LIFE !!!
His acting in the first 4 episodes of season 3 was astonishingly good- it broke my heart to see him at the end of Culloden, and when he had to leave Willie.
When he has good material, he is an amazing actor.
Unfortunately at the end of season 3, the writers wrote very badly for him. Very passive role- every single thing he does is a reaction, rather than an action.
They give him bad writing, and no actor can fix bad writing.
I do unfortunately agree with you that Sophie who plays the daughter is awful.
But I think both Caitriona and Sam are excellent.
Guys – Let’s please avoid name calling and making sweeping generalizations meant to insult each other. Respectful opinions and discourse are welcome.
Apologies Outlander BTS. But on this thread about how the writers are writing the character of Jamie: rather than focusing on the character of Jamie- this Millie person is writing multiple comments attacking Sam, and saying we only defend him because we are infatuated. She is insulting Sam, implying he is not intelligent enough to play an intelligent character- and she is insulting us fans (I consider this to be trolling). She is not addressing how Jamie is written as a character- which is the point of the thread- she is attacking Sam and us.
Got it.
Unfortunately this well written article and following commentary unleashed quite a lot of negative emotions. I looked at twitter and saw that Rik Rankin’s fans suddenly are all claiming that Sam is a mediocre and unremarkable actor – though I remember that barely week ago they were begging Sam Heughan’s fans to vote for Rik in some contest because “we should support both men!”
Rrrright *eye roll*
Respectfully, you are all wet with your comments. Many of us older women watch the show and are not infatuated with Sam, he is younger than my sons. He is just as good an actor as Catriana.
Agreed. I know that Diana chose Sam, but from the start, I’ve never thought he had much going as an actor. He’s gorgeous, and makes an awesome model, but I’m not thrilled with his portrayal of Jamie.
I noticed that in S4Ep1 the two are always seated such that Jamie is looking up at Claire. She is always seated higher, fepeatedly. I was quite curious about that. It seemed odd.
Thanks. If one could carry the show without the other would it be Jamie. He is equal not secondary to Claire. Big change needed for Jaime. In America he would be in his element not childlike.
I think the same diminishing factor exists in all interviews with either or or together since about mid-2017.It’s as if Sam and Caiitriona were instructed to stop enjoying their public interactions with giggles and fun.
I’m not here to speak about Caitriona or Claire. I feel that her merits are untouchable both acting and character wise. I’m here to speak for our long lost friend James Fraser.
You see, I fell in love with Outlander the show before ever hearing of the books (of which I have yet to read…sorry). Therefore, I have no comparison to the books version of J&C and the show. What I can attest to is the change that has unfolded on scree And that is the obvious fact that there HAS been a major regression in our strong jawed Scotsman James Fraser.
What initially drew me to the show was the richness and untouched history telling of the Jacobite backdrop, because up to that point it’s either Braveheart, Rob Roy or God forbid Highlander, none of which focus on TRUE Scottish history much less the 45, bit I digress. However, that soon took second chair to this incredible on screen chemistry between two very strong minded characters.
Unfortunately after those first two seasons I started to see changes in Jamie’s character, and not for the better. His presence was not as strong, he was having fewer and fewer moments of strong dialogue, to the point in season three where it felt like he was just along for the ride sadly.
Unfortunately the nail in my coffin for this show has been placed with Season 4 Episode 1.
The closing scene of “America the Beautiful” was nothing more than an insult in the way I observed and interpreted it. At the end of the day this show is a form of art and art’s inherent quality is the individuals interpretation towards that art form.
The playing of America the Beautiful while “pirates” attacked the riverboat left me feeling disgusted, angry, and after the smoke settled…..disappointed.
I felt that scene was deliberately intended to mock the very foundations of our great nation. By playing that music in the background as many viewers looked on, it felt to me that they unjustifiably characterized American patriots as these Pirates all the while mocking us as if by saying “see how beautiful America is.” This dangerous trend of devaluing America and its founding is disturbing as well as is the emasculating of strong male characters for the sake of equalization. You cannot achieve the celebration of a strong female character by stripping down the male counterpart or vice versa. You celebrate and showcase the strength in both characters and their strong union. If you don’t……eventually your audience will notice and tune out.
Best of luck friends. I hope you find your way back to the magic at the heart of this show.
Wow. A well articulated observation about the political motivations I mentioned in an earlier post. I think Brock makes a good point.
I am hoping that the balance of power, knowledge and leadership is restored as it was in the books. The books are fantastic as they grow and lean on each other, but not good to reduce the strength and intellect that Jamie brings to the party.
Well said Courtney and in a very respectful way. Now let’s hope they hear you.
HALLELUJAH!! I HOPE someone on the Outlander production is reading this. They are so determined to make Claire into a kick-ass feminist super-hero, that they’ve ruined Jamie in order to do so. It is outrageous how much the show has diminished Jamie- turning him into Claire’s sidekick rather than the leading man. I had such high hopes for season 3. The first four episodes of Jamie’s story were fabulous. And Sam is absolutely brilliant when he is given good material. But even he couldn’t elevate the utter DRIVEL they wrote for him for the second half of the season. As soon as Claire was back, they turned him into her puppet. It was awful. It’s infuriating and sooo WRONG!!! In season 1, somehow, they created a masterpiece. But they have decided to ruin their masterpiece in order to serve current politically correct trends on empowering women.
So very true. The magic has diminished for me. I’m very sad about the direction of Jamie’s character. Hoping the powers that be read these reviews and write JAMMF as he should be and deserves to be!
The thing is- I’m not even a book reader! But even not having read the books, I feel they are doing a huge disservice to the story by infecting it with this ove-the-top feminist bias.
They struck gold with the world’s best ever casting of Sam &Caitriona. The chemistry, the sheer talent. But Sam needs to play an Alpha male, he is the epitome of a strong leading man. When they make him into a passive wimp, it doesn’t suit him. I’m not sure I want to watch a show where Jamie is not Claire’s equal. I will likely drop the show if season 4 continues in this vein.
I wholeheartedly agree with just about everyone’s comments, especially what Ivy wrote here (feminist bias, S&C casting, turning Jamie into a wimp) . Nice to know I’m NOT the only one who has been greatly disturbed about Jamie’s character/personality being grossly diminished from the book. I, however, AM an avid reader and loved, loved, loved OUTLANDER when it first came out and was thrilled beyond reason when news came out about it being made into a series. Part of the appeal of this book was this phenomenal “King of Men” character that personified EVERY noble, virtuous and noble characteristic and personality trait that anyone could ever possess – man OR woman. He is an ALPHA male – Enters Claire, who is going to become his equal. That is what I was expecting to see; I was disturbed how Jamie’s persona/role was diminished, substituting air time for “fleshing out” with more of Black Jack and Frank (my own pet peeve). I have noticed this feminist “trend” with each new season and becomming very disturbed/sad by it. Jamie doesn’t need t/b diminished to make Claire shine. She shines in her own right! they both would…
Bravo! ?????
It’s time for Cait to go. Seems unless she’s a door mat or mute it’s her fault Jamie gets written like a Himbo even though his fans clamor for him naked morning, noon and night. Cait can go and leave Sam to his fans and then he can just run around with his muscles bulging and screwing all the young maidens he wants to or beating them. Whichever is his fancy that day. His fans have turned Jamie into into a brainless beefcake. So of course the writers cater to that. So it’s time for Cait to take her awards and move on. I’m sure that will magically mean Sam will now be Oscar worthy with Cait out of his way 🙂
Did you read anything in the article at all. You are so far off the mark. Sam and Caits acting are brilliant but they can only act on the script they are given, it has always been Jamies story but the writers want to change this .
NO!Catriona IS REALLY NOT THE PROBLEM-ITS THE POWERS THAT BE.SHE IS JUST DOING HER JOB-DOING WHAT SHE IS TOLD.HER LEAVING WILL NOT CHANGE A THING.WE WANT THEM TO GIVE SAM MEATIER PIECES THATS ALL.HE IS NOT A WHIMP!
Even in S1, they started changing Jamie’s persona where he couldn’t touch Claire (after the rape) which was carried into S2, where he was aroused by a whore, not Claire. So wrong. Making Leoghaire more important was a mistake. Jamie didn’t know she was responsible for Claire’s arrest when he married her; his weak response was awful. Can any of us believe he would marry the person who tried to have Claire burned at the stake? Most of the changes have weakened Jamie’s character and alpha male presence. We fell in love with a warrior who was also loving, but the series has ignored the fans in making the series. Bring back Jamie. Stop adding unnecessary extraneous scenes.
I can’t agree more. Cait and Sam are fantastic! Love them
Both. The issue is with the writing. They changed Jamie’s character and therefor Claire’s character. Neither of them deserved the change, it’s not helping the story and neither their characters. Jamie is not the K of M anymore; he is not the kind, smart, strong, powerful, tender, loving, fierce man and Claire is not the kind, smart, fierce, determined and loving woman anymore. They are not equals anymore. If there was a reason why I got hooked with the show and later on with the books is bc of the equality between the main characters. They need eachother to be who they truly are. And now, this has change and not for the best. As a huge fan of Claire and Cait from the beginning it saddens me to see the changes, I don’t recognize my fav character. And yes,even being a huge Claire/Cait fan it saddens me to see how diminishing the show is towards Jamie. The result? They are not lifting Claire’s character, they are actually taking both down!!
In regards of the awards… they both deserve the nominations and awards but truth be told Sam has it very difficult bc his lines and scenes are not as dramatic or powerful and he is not getting the key moments, Balfe is. Again, even as a Balfe fan , more than Sam’s, I don’t like this. It’s not even fair! They both. Should have the same time, the same drama, the same chances. Still, very very happy for Balfe. She deserves it. We fans want the power couple back! We want our J n C back and we want our S n C back. We want equality. B4 is my fav I hope they get it right and they bring back Claire and Jamie back to who they are. And as for Sam and Cait.. just want them to succeed but not At the expense of the other. The production and writers and even cast needs to step up the game!!
Totally agree. Production beware, this choice of yours will cost all of us seasons that could have been ( I so hope I am wrong…).
There is no Outlander without Jamie. Claire is only the storyteller! Ask the fans if they would be interested in Outlander without him. He carries this show!!!
Unfortunately, because the chemistry between Cait and Sam is so phenomenal, should either actor leave, it would be the end of the show. No one has ever commented on this scene but one of Sam’so best scenes in S2 was when he was explaining to his troops what it was really like to face a hail of bullets; I thought he came across as truly mature, commander-in-chief!
I have never understood why Sam has been overlooked for the major awards. His acting skills are as good as Cait’s!
Don’t agree with you at all and I’ve also read comments from the women who aren’t really interested in the story or character play but just want to watch sex scenes. Cait and Sam are both wonderful in their roles, but season 3 seemed to lose control of Diana’s genius storytelling by turning the 18th century into a 21st century Feminazis’ view of the world – I may be exaggerating a bit but thought both Claire and Jamie were not the characters I know and love.
Wow – this post saddens me! It comes across as very mean spirited, disrespectful and hurtful.
I do appreciate most comments even if I held a different opinion on a particular issue.
I have read all of the books several times. I have maneuvered (in my mind) from book to series to fill in any discrepancies. I appreciated the time spent developing the Boston Clair/Frank/Bree triad – it portrayed some of the obstacles in Claire’s training (of that era) just as it fleshed out Frank’s frustrations as a shadow husband – all-the-while coming together as loving parents. Just as much, I enjoyed how Jamie’s years without Claire were portrayed. I think Season 4 will be just fine as J&C begin to build a life together. I see opportunities for strong scripts for both Actors. I see so much equality in their relationship – they have different strengths and weaknesses and together their sum total soars above their individual parts. Cudos and respect to both Cat and Sam!!
Totally rude and inappropriate. You really need to learn that the fans, both Sams & Caits want to see the Jamie that Diana created. Don’t want to expand because this is so totally out of line b
Joanne, Maybe it _does_ come across as mean spirited, disrespectful and hurtful to her. I don’t see that or agree, but I don’t think she’s being rude – she’s just explaining her experience. I’m OK with that. xo
Hmmm – Seems a bit extreme… but humorous to imagine!
Neither Cait nor Sam need to go anywhere . Have you been reading any of this or taking in what is being said? Sorry – but you sound like The Village Idiot —
You apparently missed all of the Caitriona bashing that went on for several days before Courtney decided to delete them. They were disgusting.
????????
Well said, Ivy. Hopefully the writers and producers will get Outlander back on track. This is Jamie and Claire, a love and a marriage of equals.
Totally agree. So sick of them changing the dynamics to serve the agenda of female empowerment. I have read all the books & hope they go back to following the story as it is in the books. They need to depict him as the Highlander that he is & not the subservient spouse they are trying to make him. Season 3 was a big disappointment. Hope season 4 goes back to basics.
We all are aware of the me too movement but not everything needs to cater to female empowerment.
We all understand that Claire is a strong woman but it needs to be written as a strong partnership.
Like you I felt something got lost after episode 6 of the third season, but couldn’t put my finger on it. I clearly remember thinking in “Doldrums” that Jamie had an unusual expression when “he followed Claire into the storage room for sex”.It felt strange to see him this way. Reading this and the responses I was able to figure it out. Claire is the usual initiator both in their intimate life and in the storyline. The interview above shows Sam gets it, too. That bothers me. Although I read that both Sam and Cait are contracted through book seven, there might be a mid contract negotiating clause where this kind of thing could be worked out. It’s not unheard of with long running series. I couldn’t bear losing Sam because the show dies if he exits. Overall, the series has been de!ightful, and I don’t blame anyone or point my finger at anyone. Sam is given Co-star billing meaning he gets equal script time. This season he became a sex starved teenager. In Season 2 Analise told Claire that Jamie had changed since she knew him, she said, “You took the boy, and made him a man” Would she feel the same if she saw him in second half of Season three? Sam went from portraying an amazing survivor to puppy dog.
Thus the “Bat Suit”!!
Yep. That flippin’ suit annoyed me no end. Part of the ‘fun’ in the book for me was that Claire was always ‘losing’ her clothes, and to have seen the ‘Jessica Gutenburg’ dress would have been brilliant. I can’t think of any material/stitching that could withstand all that salt water and extreme heat and still look brand new. Did they have a smaller budget for her costumes for season 3?
To be fair, I thought there were some great moments in the second half of Season 3. I personally liked 306, A. Malcolm, and 308 – we saw Jamie be a badass in that one, I loved 311, Turtle Soup was fab, and a lot of the finale. I don’t think the producers have ruined the show by any stretch of the imagination. I just think they need to tweak the perspective of Jamie’s character, and make him more alpha, as people have so aptly stated here. Have him tell Claire when she’s gone a bit too far, and not spend whole episodes emphasizing that she’s places her career above all else. I think the producers have truly put their hearts and souls into this show and I would never want to diminish their work – I just suggest they take a look at the well stated thoughts here, and possibly allow them to influence their perspective going forward…
I agree! Loved so much of Season 3. I do agree with this clip, it felt odd, I hope it is just because we are seeing such a small part of it.
Good point Monica!
Yes!!!
Yep, pretty much.
I was disappointed with the 2nd,half of season 3. For a variety of reasons. I realize it a lot of material to cover in the number of episodes. Turning Jamie into little more than a lap dog disturbs me. I had hoped thecseries would follow the books. Sadly…..
In that time and space PC did not exist. Making political statements by twisting the show to make Claire the dominant one, rather than them be a matched paircand both equally the lead bothers me.
For me, I have never cared for Cait as Claire.
I have accepted her though.
If the writers continue down this path of keeping Jamie as a Claire’s subordinant…. they will lose viewers…and turn season 4 into a debacle.
In truth, I really don’t think they care..
I think they care a lot and are doing their best. Let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water ?
Yet ratings keep going up. Cait has just as many fans that don’t give a shit about Sam’s muscles. Cait is the stronger actor by far. You want a doormat, find another show.
Anne, I think he’s more than a lap dog! I just think he’s not the strong man we know and love from the books. I think debacle is a strong word – I loved many parts of Season 3, even in the second half. I eagerly await Season 4, and hope that Jamie’s character continues to expand into all that we know he is…
Wow, you said what was in the back of my mind! I love Season 1, season 2 was good, and season 3 was a bust in my opinion. I rarely watch the stories in season 3. The one scene that got my dander up was when Jamie realizes it is Claire flashing the mirror and runs to her. He’s running and she’s standing there doing something with her fingers. That scene could have been done much better with Claire running to Jamie, which would be the logical thing to do.
I hope that season 4 has gotten the show “back on track” with TWO strong people, Jamie and Claire. All in all, I see Jamie and Claire as one of the all time great love stories along Lizzie and Mr Darcy, Cathy and Heathcliff, etc.
Pat! I rewatched that scene – and I have to say, Claire is DESPERATE and almost sobbing as she calls to Jamie, and she does run to him. I thought Episode 311 was great.
I feel that there is too much of a feminist theme running thru these comments. Sam has received many accolades as to his acting and they do not rely on his good looks as the basis for these articles. It’s a give and take in the books and the same in the adaptations of the writers. These are wonderful books, difficult to accurately adapt. To overcome the 20 years they were apart is alone a difficult adaptation but I feel they both have done a great job.
Beware fans! All the negativity may just cause a quick ending to Outlander and I, along with every other fan, will be very sad. I want to see the culmination of this story. Please do not pick apart the relationship. Let it develop on it’s own. They are two charismatic actors doing a great job of portraying a difficult time in their lives.
Exactly my thoughts Louise! Fans can give their opinions but I think it needs to be in a more respectful way. All the negativity is making me anxious that Outlander may not continue if everyone just beats it to the ground. 🙁
I agree Wendy. If people can’t be respectful, they should refrain from commenting. Maybe the producers do what I do – and that’s skip over negative/abusive and/or nonsense comments. I think Outlander will be around for a while x
I very much doubt that they even read these things.
KC – Toni has remarked that she reads blogs – probably more so the episode recaps, but still. I prefer that people remain respectful, whether they read it or not. I read it!
Ivy, I appreciate your passion, but I have to disagree with your comment about the second half of S3 being utter drivel – that’s harsh. There were wonderful moments in the second half of S3 – even in my least favorite episode of the whole season – 307, I really liked the scene in which Jamie goes nuts about Bree’s bikini. That was consummate Jamie Fraser. And I thought episode 308 was SO good. Lots of great moments. Our Outlander writers deserve respect and support, please keep that in mind when sharing your opinions.
Hi OutlanderBTS,
I didn’t say the second half of the season was drivel. I said what they wrote FOR JAMIE in the second half was drivel. (I agree with you that episode 8 was excellent, and I liked the turtle soup scene and some other things).
But on the whole, Jamie gets unbearably cheesy lines quite often- nothing intelligent ever seems to come out of his mouth lately. And basically everything they wrote for him in the second half was reaction rather than action. The writers don’t allow Jamie to initiate anything- he just gets dragged along by whatever Claire is up to. I’m not a book reader- so I’m not complaining about not adhering to “book Jamie”.
I’m comparing the show to itself. Given how brilliant season 1 was, I know the production are capable of doing great things! In season 1 Jamie was written as a compelling, clever, charismatic, deep-thinking guy. Part 2 of season 3 made him seem like a poodle. To me the difference is really glaring. Yes there were some great moments, but overall it seems way off track. And i’m not particularly obsessed with watching the relationship when he seems so passive and weak.
As a book reader I find it interesting when people say that in season 1 Jamie’s characterization was perfect. For me there were issues from the start. Like the episode with Duke of Sandringham, where Jamie was potrayed as an airheaded adolescent with mature, wise wife who solved his problems behind his back without him ever noticing anything. While in the book Jamie dealt with the Duke on his own and managed to use Sandringham’s visit for his advantage by putting a little show in the front of McKenzie clan to subtly make Collum know the real reason behind his abrupt leave from Leoch years ago (granted, it was not PC as it involved some tales about the Dukes’ crude advances toward 16 years old Jamie). Then there was Lallybroch episode and Jamie as flop! laird who had no clue and Claire needed to show him the error of his ways – while the book potrayed Jamie, Jenny and Ian as a trio of very competent 20-something year old people running the estate in unison. And then there was seemingly little details missing from the show – like agate rosary Claire’s got as a gift from Collum, which was supposed to defend one against black magic. Jamie cleverly brought it to Crainsmuir and thrown it around Claire’s neck in the front of the mob as a proof she is not a witch – which managed to slow them down at least for a moment. These small moments suggested that Jamie, despite of his young age, managed to control the crowd, which later becomes essential to his character as a mature man.
That’s my problem with show!Jamie – not that he has flaws because book!Jamie has plenty of them IMO but that his intelligence, rough stubborness and leadership skills are diminished. Of course there are episodes which depict those qualities perfectly – like “Prestonpans” for example, but then I remember these left some non-book readers confused why Jamie is suddenly such a strategy prodigy, since very little seemed to suggest it in previous episodes.
I forgot about Lallybroch where Jamie behaves like an adolescent rather than laird. Can’t understand the reason for the changes in Jamie’s character. I’ll keep watching the series, but some fans might not. And the bottom line for Starz is numbers, so I suggest that Ron, etc., pay attention to our comments so that Starz keeps renewing the contract.
Totally agree that hey have really gutted the character of Jamie as a strong man.
That’s why i go back & read the books.
The series,if you are a book reader has been a disappointment but I will probably still watch.
Got it Ivy, thanks for that clarification about the drivel comment. There have been a lot of reactions to this piece on social media and one of the complaints is that book fans can’t separate the books from the show, so it’s interesting that you are a show only person and have this experience. Again, great show, just would like to see this tweak. x
I think there is clearly a problem with many book fans expecting every detail from the book to be included in the show.
And unfortunately that complaint is taking up way too much oxygen– the producers are probably so fed up with hearing it, that they are failing to hear legitimate complaints about messing up major themes of the show.
As i said, I’m only comparing the show to itself. And the show has been very inconsistent on major themes. There have been some serious errors that are very obvious and should not have happened. Season 1 established an intense love story and compelling, clever protagonists. Season 2 lost the intense connection of the protagonists- they had very little physical or emotional connection compared to season 1 (producers cut “romance” to make time for intrigue- losing sight of the soul of the story, and diminishing the JC connection). This mistake was so glaringly obvious that to be fair they did try to fix it in season 3 (more sex, more JC pillow talk, etc).
In season 3, they started out with Jamie as a very intense, dynamic man – and basically emasculated him as soon as Claire arrived, in order to make her the driving force of the story. Again, this is a glaring and obvious mistake that should not have happened. Jamie went from Alpha male to poodle in the space of a few episodes, making the second half of the season strangely unsatisfying to watch, despite the protagonists being reunited.
The inconsistency in the writing of Jamie’s character is mind boggling (Creme de Menthe was almost unwatchably awful). And book readers are saying that the writers are taking actions and dialogue away from Jamie, and giving those to Claire- which is making the problem worse.
From the season 4 teaser trailer, it seems that the mistake of diminishing Jamie to empower Claire may continue or get even worse. And as one of the commentators here has said, season 4 is already written and shot. So even if the producers do read this, it’s too late for them to fix it.
I think it’s fine for them to make whatever plot changes they want in order to better serve the adaptation; but it’s not OK that they change the main characters or key themes (the lack of JC connection in season 2, and Jamie’s wimpy character in season 3).
In 2014 I bought Season 1 dvds for circa 25 different people as Christmas gifts, etc, and got those people into watching the show- they all LOVED season 1.
Almost all of them dropped out in season 2, and the rest did drop out in season 3. Not a single one of my friends that I introduced to Outlander is still watching the show…. sadly.
Fair enough!
I hope they do too and I agree with your comment complete. I will add that it appears that the writers are trying to create a story loosely based on DG work. We are all right , the S1 was brilliant and so S2 for the most part. I think they were because they stayed with books. What a waste of time and energy to not embrace the books and portray the story as DG wrote it. They have to stop being worried about the current political atmosphere and do the books.
Right on right on right on. I’m married to a man’s man and I wouldn’t have it any other way. I’m a Texas gal and my husband is an Italian. Yes, at times, we lock horns, but we respect each other and I don’t think he’d have me any other way and I know I don’t want him to be anything other than he is…or as Claire says, “a bloody man.” The criticism about the emasculation of Jaime is very valid.
The Outlander TV writers and Ron seem to agree that the story writing rule of “it can only be about one person” is still true. “This is Us” and many shows break that rule weekly. Only an hour of time to work with was plenty of time for “Dowton Abby” to show us many characters growth, development, and inter relationships. Tony Grafia said that in the reunion episode, “we just wanted to take our time.” The characters were certainly written to “take their time”. But characters have to want and need something to drive the action, even if “taking their time!” No wonder Sam felt crying was forced at seeing Bree’s photo, he and Cait were written into a corner where the pauses were so pregnant and questions so limited that no emotional connection could be made. (I do realize this is also on the directors shoulders and I feel in cost cutting measures and an effort to use new talent they found someone too green to push the action and keep the actors and audience emotionally connected to it.) These are classic directoral problems.
Diana has written books that Ron, Tony and Matt and much of society don’t seem to realize are about two people as “the one journey.” We love Gabaldon’s books because they give us the full vision (the good, the bad and the ugly) of a couple as ONE entity. In the midst of the current battle for women’s and LGBT equality we seek a vision going forward in which any two people can find what Jamie and Claire have together. Gabaldon has the vision but Outlander the TV series seems lost in the past where we were the only concern was about women’s equality. Book reader’s have found a framework in which to seek much much more.
Very well said!!! I want Jamie and Claire to be like they were in Season 1… equals with fire and energy and lots of love for each other. Please pick up the pen and use DGs books to make this series ALL it can be!! Fortunately we still have the books! We just want to see it on the screen. LOVE OUTLANDER!!!!!!!
Do you think that Ron Moore’s less hands on role in the production since the first season is part of the problem?
no.
my favorite is Season one, maybe because of their wanting of each other, if I was the director, I would’ve done something different on the scene when he takes her back to her room after the concert. there should’ve have been a kiss involved.I don’t like a demanding man but I do like a man that leads me and make me feel like his woman, I love that power over me, I would loose respect if a man becomes a yes dear person. The attraction has to be alive constantly, otherwise there’s no respect. on S3, Malcolm, I was shocked that Claire was ok with sleeping in the Brothel also shocked that Jamie would take her there, I would’ve done that scene differently, Claire should’ve walked out and Jamie would’ve followed her. She’s a Doctor, so there was no awareness on cleanliness when it came on sleeping in that bed. I do agree with most of the complaints, since I’m from the 60’s, the man was always in charge, not in a superiority way but in a beautiful way thats why my marriage lasted 47 years versus today’s marriages. Claire was born in 1918, are you kidding with me? how modern do you think a woman of that time was? I had grandparents, born near that time I’ve never seen my grandmother make all the decision. I love Outlander and its history but I need to look up to Jamie the very heart of the story and I don’t mean as a sex symbol but as a man that loves, provides and defends Claire, the woman that made his heart pound.
So we’ll put. Jamie is never a lap dog!
The book Jamie is to me, almost like a demi-god; strong, very intelligent but also very sensitive. He knows so much about everything; nature, ancient history and also about spirituality. __ Everyone ___ looks up to him and admires him, especially
Claire. I don’t think this is shown enough in the show. I like the show and I know that it is very hard to get all of this in, but I wish they would __ try ___!!
Written pauses? Actors make those choices. Sam made a choice about the photos because he cannot deliver a believable scene. His “breakdown” leaving Willie was one long pained face. That’s it. But you all are in love with him so you cannot see it. Award shows can.
Millie, To be fair, I think Sam is a bit inconsistent as an actor at this stage and with the current script burden, but he absolutely has moments of brilliance IMO. The wedding episode, his deleted scene from 207, his work with David Berry in S3, 115 and 116, in fact so many examples in S1, 301, 304, the list goes on. He will only get better with age. As for the in love part – he is pretty charismatic, but I think that’s an over statement ?.
Absolutely agree with this. I would not have read books three times if they had the soul of the show. Even Jamie healing from BJR’s assault on him diminished him. It was not like that in the books. I love them both, as a couple, in the books. How their strengths play off each other and how they depend on each other’s strengths. And, yes, how Claire says, “He is a man.” All you included in this article is very well out. I love the actors. Sam IS Jamie. I would hate to see him continue to be diminished in the show. Hate it. I will continue to watch. But am hoping they stop make ngvit the Claire show. Without Jamie as he should be, there is no story
Totally agree, about the second half of season 3, before then we saw Jamies’ sense of responsibility, to his men , then his son, then his family, even Leoghaire and her children, he loves Claire and demonstrates this time and again, but I feel that sometimes her character comes across in the show as if she could manage without him, this is not the Claire in the books, she can only be her true self because of Jamies’ love and support and spends time caring for him in other ways than medical and sex she gives more affection and attention .
Polly, you are exactly right. I watched 2 seasons of the show before I read the books, then read all 8. When reading I was struck by how different the book Claire was from the one on the screen. Claire loves this man to her marrow and is not whole without him. She respects him and admires him and regularly tells him so. She’s happy to be his wife and be by his side. I love that about this relationship. I think in trying to portray the awkwardness of their reunion after 20 years, the writers and directors gave us two characters whom we barely recognized. Of the two, Sam’s character suffered most.
I LOVE this show and Sam and Cait. They’ve given us something extraordinary but I have to admit S3 was a disappointment to me. Going forward I hope the producers return to the story of this amazingly beautiful relationship that is Claire AND Jamie Fraser.
I think that we see the results of this lessening of Jaime’s character reflected in the face of the nominations of awards going out to Catriona and none to Sam. Like everyone else on here, I adore Cat and do not want in any way to take anything away from her fabulous performances. I do however think that by lessening the strength of Jaime’s character, we see those results in those lack of nominations for Sam, whom I believe to be every bit as deserving. One only has to look at the deleted scene in S2 of Jamie’s reaction to the death of his daughter Faith. Why was this small but powerful scene deleted? Because it impinged on the weight of Claire’s grief? We should have been able to view that grief through both parents eyes, not to mention that it was a powerful scene for Sam to portray. I have to agree with the main thread of this post. It is not necessary to dilute Catriona’s fabulous acting to give the character of Jamie(and Sam) the strength and intelligence he deserves, and is equally portrayed in the books.
Thank you for mentioning the deleted scene on the death of Faith. I cried like a baby. It truly showed the pain that men experience at the death of a child. Brilliantly played by Sam and left on the cutting room floor.
Yes!!!!! That extented scene with Jamie and her was the culmination of ALL they had been building up to in the two seasons! As Jamie said….ONLY the TWo of them could carry this lose together…It cemented their bond more than anything else…and made hi sending her back through the stones to protect Bree even more poignant, sad, and understanding….That was a poor decsion…Ron said they decided to make the episode about CLAIRE! Thats exactly what we are talking about here…Deminishing THEIR relationship and Jamie as equal half of it!
I have never seen that deleted scene. But Sam/Jamie has had some tremendous scenes and I don’t understand why he has been overlooked, e.g., S1the entire rape scene was so powerful a part for Sam to play. He had to give more of himself as an actor than Tobias. S3, Sam was phenomenal in the argument scene, right after Laoghaire & her daughters appeared. He deserves much more credit than he receives. The writers need to heed the book more, and realize that these people live in the 18thc, NOT the 20th! That being said, the man is head-of-household, & we know that Jamie is more than capable. Claire takes a backseat to him, at least in public. I love that he makes the decisions or they make them together. Jamie usually knows best! I get that Claire is a strong woman-how many of us could put aside all our niceties to rough-it in the 1700s?! BUT, if I hear one more woman extol how strong a woman Claire is, I will scream!!!! The fans, younger women, whomever, need to get “it,” WE (women) are strong, we should not need to be told! Claire is unusual for the 1700s because she’s gone back in time, and she had been through a war. She’s also very stubborn. Now, 20 yrs. later, she’s matured, she’s become a Dr., she knows much more than the other people living in the 1700s. BUT, her driving force in life is still Jamie! And, her medicine. As such, they are a modern couple, and this is how they should be portrayed. For me, Jamie/Sam is the whole show. If his character is emasculated, or Sam leaves, I also leave, watching the show. Thank you for starting this dialogue!
This is perhaps why we are antsy when it comes to the repositioning of certain scenes and lines… I think you are on to something. We love both characters and want to see them fully actualized with each other. Thanks for letting us air our opinions.
I am always up for a respectful, intelligent discussion!
BOOM!!! This post was like a stake in Dracula’s heart. Finally the truth. There is a huge blue wave if dissatisfied fans about the series “gutting” the book Jamie. The fault lies squarely with the production side of this project. They have heard from the fan base….but their replies are snarky and defensive. Basically saying back to the fans….”talk to my hand.” They seem determined to snatch defeat out of the mouth of success. Jamie & Claire each bring greatness to this coupling….making the story compelling. In all honesty, I only watch the show to see Jamie’s story unfold. Season 1 was good….but the wheels started coming off the series as it applies to Jamie during Season 2. The “wheels were totally gone in Season 3. It is a huge mystery as to why they “bastardized” the book Jamie. Diana gave them all they needed to present a perfect story….and they chose a different path regardless. The series has lost it way in a conscious and deliberate manner. I wish I didn’t have to write a comment like this, but the production team has turned a deaf ear to this thunderous outcry from loyal fans. They’re losing me and I am not alone.
I agree fully. Wish production would make Jamie and Claire as a couple. Equal as in the books.
Agree with every word, so well said. It is one thing to give us convoluted explanations regarding the omission of certain scenes and much loved book dialogue, why things need to be changed and repackaged because the written and visual mediums are so different ( even though it makes no sense to any sensible person!.
Another thing altogether to change the soul of the characters so that they become unknown and unrecognisable, altered to such a degree that their words, behaviours and therefore actions no longer belong to our beloved characters. This has happened to Jamie repeatedly and is truly heartbreaking.
It is seeing the assasination of Jamie’s character, the essence of who he is, sacrificed for what writers, producers, see as a greater good ( for heavens sake), that will see the ultimate demise of our beloved Outlander. Diana’s books have been the phenomenal success they are for a reason. The show needs to get back to the grass roots of the story and understand it better I do believe.
Carolyn I agree with what you say. I noticed in Season 3 how wonderful Sam’s performances were in the episodes that did not include Cait, (or Claire). As in the books, Jamie and Claire are a couple, one not whole without the other. but when they come together again in Episode 6 and thereafter, the whole has become a 3/4 by 1/4 entity. At first I blamed the change on the new writers they brought on board, and that may be part of the problem. But for the most part the production crew are the same as in Season 1 and there seems to be an effort to re-make Jamie as someone we don’t really know, and who has no relationship the book Jamie at all. Cait is a fine actress and a beautiful woman and has made Claire her own. However, the strength that was one of Claire’s most endearing qualities has morphed into an 18th. century Wonder Woman, towing her love obsessed mate behind her with her golden cord. That is not how the books portray either Jamie or Claire. I am certain that the entire cast, crew and production staff want Outlander to succeed in the future, but it will not without the support of the fans who fell in love with it from the first episode, and we fans will drift away in dribs and drabs if they don’t return to the original concept, both from the books and the first two seasons, of the Fraser’s being a couple forging through life together rather than Mighty Mom dragging her favorite boy toy behind her and sending him into the fray when she feels threatened. And just how long will Sam allow himself to be diminished as an actor by playing second fiddle to an actress who is very good, but not better than he? I am highly offended by these people who try to equate Sam’s fans as a bunch of old ladies obsessed with his handsome face and bulging muscles. He became Jamie Fraser to me in the cottage where Murtagh took Claire after her encounter with Black Jack and she intruded on them trying to fix his dislocated shoulder and he looked up at her as if she had descended from heaven, and as he later told her was when he first fell for her, the first time he ever set eyes on her. Go back and look at the scenes from Season 1, 15 and 16, where he does not have to play against Claire, Episode 1 and 4 of Season 3, and you will see a fine actor, even a great actor whose talents are being wasted playing second fiddle to his co-star.
Now only if the production team takes heed and starts writing Jamie as the alpha male he is. I’m surprised we haven’t seem Jamie outfitted in a polka-dot kilt!!!
I agree with every word of this post. I have made these same comments on Twitter and tagged the show’s producers and writers. I love Outlander and I admire Cait as an actress and a strong female character. But the writers and producers have done Sam a great disservice by how they have diluted his character in the show especially in the second part of S3. There were a number of episodes that featured the Claire character that were unnecessary and the Jamie character was regulated to being a bit player. It’s a great pity that this is the direction that they have decided to take the show in. In doing so they have missed a chance to secure new viewers and guarantee more seasons. Sam is the driving force in Outlander and he is the main draw for a lot of fans. The diminishing of the character he plays will result in lost fans and not many new fans. That is indeed a great pity. Outlander had the potential to be a really great show but lost its way after S2
Audrey: Well said.
Agree 100% Audrey. Outlander is about to lose me if they still choose to ignore the fact that Jamie is the draw for the show. He is a strong, proud Scot in the book and the writers and producers are making him out to be some wimpy, lovelorn man who can’t seem to do anything with Claire. I will give S4 a chance, but if I see the same thing, that’s it for me…i will just re-watch S1!
EXACTLY. He’s never met a shirtless pic of himself he didn’t like. He’s a beefcake matched with a much stronger actress. Get over it sam.
Yup!!
I completely concur with the comments. It almost feels like she is the main star and he the co-star. I hope it changes back.
I totally agree. What’s more, I respectfully have to state that I have watched all Cait’s scenes and just feel her acting is not good enough to portray Claire. This is not disrespect, this is an evaluation of many, many performances. When people say they love the scenes with Jamie, it’s not just because he is a hunk or wears a kilt. It’s because Sam is the more convincing actor in the show. I have nothing against Cait but she just doesn’t have the acting skills necessary for this part. Many say they have chemistry, well I just don’t see it or feel it. I don’t see any attraction between them at all in fact. I wish they had chosen a different actress for the part, it may have been a better show. But I also agree that they have diminished the story of Jamie and have changed his character. He’s not portrayed the way Diana portrays him, and let’s face it, the way he’s written is why there are so many fans of the books. But it’s also the way Claire was written that readers loved. They really twisted the story and the characters into something we don’t recognize or want. Perhaps it’s the times we live in. Women are being brainwashed into thinking that we can do anything. That would be wonderful but it’s just wishful thinking. When the apocalypse arrives, I’ll be looking for the strong men to protect me, thank you very much.
I have to respectfully disagree with you. I think between the two of them Caitriona is the more convincing actor. Sorry but Sam is just not up to her level and skill in my opinion. What he did with the Willie reveal was a complete disaster and he admits that was his decision. And when the apocalypse arrives I will be protecting myself and whom ever else needs it because I am very capable.
I agree to an extent but whilst I think Sam is the way better actor, particularly with his stage background, Cait has gotten better as the seasons progress. As I write we are almost at season 5. As for having no chemistry, well, you will not get many who agree with this at all, in fact the show is a major success because of the amazing chemistry between the actors. I have never watched a show, and I watch a lot of shows, that has 2 leads who appear to be totally into each other to the degree Sam and Cait are. I am also a reader of the books and agree that book Jamie is a way different character to show Jamie. They seem to have diluted Jamie a lot, not sure why?
I agree with all the comments made. I to believe the Jamie character is being pushed back instead of being pushed forward. It would be nice to see a little more of the real book Jamie instead of the one we have seen this past season. SH does a wonderful job as Jamie so please let him show us strength & gentleness all wrapped up in one powerful character. We love Outlander & want to see more book verses someone else’s interpretation.
I totally agree with both your thoughtful, well written post as well as the resulting comments. There is such a loss of the essential character of Jamie as time goes by, and it is almost glaringly apparent in the writing and direction of scenes where he could have been so much “more”……more the man we love and respect who is found in the novels. Outlander seems to be infected with an obvious feminist bias. Fans who know this couple long for greater equality in strength, in essential dialog, and in their portrayal of a marriage based on mutual support and respect.
Well said! Season one was phenomenal and season two began the change which I understood as they were no longer in Scotland. But as time went on and Season three was built on the reunion, a lot of people were disapppointed. The brothal arrangements, the sense of cockiness in Jamie as a thief, his lying to Ian…that is not Jamie…who was always honest and frank about his feelings. Please, let’s get the strong, kind, funny, loving Jamie back.
I totally agree with Courtney that Jamie’s roll have been downsized quite a bit by now – but alas…- brothel arrangements, Jamie as a smuggler (not a thief!) and lying to Ian was all in the books. But soo much more elaborated and true to his character – not the crude, one dimensional character he seemed in the show for a couple of episodes there. There were some scenes later on where I could spot the old Jamie in the show, but the dilution is severe at the last scene on the beach where Jamie needed Claire to tell him they were in America.
Not to speak of the lame trailer for S4…… Agree – wanted to smash something at the TV but couldn’t put my finger on why. Thank you for putting words on that feeling.
Yes – it all started in S2 and it looks like we will have to live with the Super Hero Claire…. Sigh.
If super hero Claire continues, I’m out. In my opinion, she is the most annoying character in the books even though it’s partially her story. I already skip over Claire-centric episodes. Keep in mind I am speaking of the character Claire, and not Caitriona.
I remember being so enchanted and obsessed with S1, I thought it was just brilliant! Now it seems like all the writers from that season are gone.
Zingo – there WERE some great Jamie moments in the second half of S3, I agree. It throws us off when he is so not Jamie (like the bribery of Fergus) or as someone mentioned, when Claire lead them into the jungle toward Abandawe (even though he was carrying the torch, behind her), etc. It would be so easy to show Claire’s strength and still preserve Jamie’s true character in these moments…
Should we candy coat the eighteenth century? Absolutely not! Play it as written. For those who want to ignore the realities of history, I invite them to watch Disney. Bonnet was a dirt bag in his day. Why not deal with that truth, something that is out of fashion today.
Jamie and Claire have a fascinating relationship throughout the years. Please stick with the way it was written. Claire is a super woman but She doesn’t need a cape to reveal that fact.
The love Jamie and Claire have for each other makes for the sweetest group of books I have ever experienced
They should put Jamie & Claire back on the same strong footing as in season 1. They are deviating tk much from the books & having Claire doing things that Jamie or someone else did or said. Please bring back our true Jamie & Claire.
While I did not care for the story line of Claire and the excise man, I enjoyed season 3 and did not see Jamie emasculated at all by Claire so I can’t really get my head around this review.
Ned,I agree
Jamie was not emasculated by Claire, that is not the point of this post. We are saying that the Jamie character has been hollowed out and is not representative of the character we love from the books and whom we saw in S2 and S2. The Jamie character after EP. 6 of S3 is a shadow of the man who fans fell in love with in S1&2
Audrey….with all due respect…..I don’t think you and I read the same books. Series can no longer be called an “adaption” of the books I read. It has become a “feminist opinion” to many….meaning, no alpha males required. Book Jamie was a witty, intelligent, alpha male. Series Jamie is presented quite differently. Sam, casted in that role, had the “acting chops” to deliver a book Jamie….had the production team tread the same path as the book. Series will lose original fans and not gain new fans without a stronger Jamie and a less militant Claire. Author’s original intent was to have Claire telling Jamie’s story….in the series, this is not happening.
Have a look at the video above where Sam pretty much says his character has been relegated to doing whatever Claire says. It looks that way to me, too. He’s a real leader in the books. Strong. Far less so in the show., IMO.
So we’ll put. Jamie is never a lap dog!
I agree Ned. I thought Jamie was particularly strong in episodes 11 and 12 and enjoyed his scenes with Lord John immensely; actually preferred the way they played out to what was written in the book.
I really liked him in those episodes too Anne
Ned, thank you so much for offering your opinion respectfully – I appreciate it x
I agree with you. Some of the responses make me feel as though they haven’t actually read the books. So how can they make such negative review’s.
I have read the series 3 or 4 times because I love the books. The books totally revolve around Jamie and Claire’s magnificent love story and I feel the series follows the books as closely as possible. It would be impossible to translate the books to tv exactly as the books are written. We fans just need to accept that fact and move on and stop being unrealistic in our criticism’s. I am just a concerned fan that doesn’t want to lose our Jamie and Claire/Sam and Cait.
Thank you, thank you for so artfully bringing up a huge problem and disconnect. During Droughtlander, besides re-reading all the books and the LJG series, I have hunted down as many panel and individual interviews I could find. They started off great, like Season 1,(my opinion— because DG was in so many and was more involved in the scripts and filming) and have rapidly deteriorated culminating in the Emmy Consideration Preview and panel. I was FURIOUS as were many others and then most of the angry comments and posts were deleted from the various Outlander sites that keep on with rosy, love affair. In short, they SCREWED. Sam. The video cut off every powerful Sam scene while playing Cait’s strongest scenes in their entirety. His fellow panelists were rude to him, playing up the strong woman theme you described above. I was so grateful to see Sam on a solo interview with the LA Times. He was wonderful. No comment on Cait, since you want us to be polite. But her venomous “Sam needs to be put in his place”…hey deary, I am a woman and you can’t fool me. This may seem petty, but I am so angry, I can’t even vote for Cait on all the “people” polls, like Best Polls. (notice Sam one the most Handsome Man in the World -2017 and Cait didn’t win her category. Sam had more then double her votes ..these are Outlander fans that did not WANT to take one more minute to vote for her. Anger and frustration manifested and bubbling to the surface. I sincerely mean this, if it wasn’t for Sam Heughan/Jamie Fraser, I would no longer watch the series. I will patiently wait for Book 9 and 10 and more LJG books. My career before retirement taught me how to read people and interpret body language and key words and behavior. I wouldn’t be surprised if the evident tension is a result of Sam pushing back. I also found it VERY intriguing that Graham McTavish and Duncan Lacroix happen to be in LA and had dinner with Sam (no Cait as in the past). They were there to support him Uncle and godfather come to life. As DG has said so many times, this is a story about Jamie and told by Claire. Time for the series to follow for this is the heart and soul of the books. Oh and thanks Ron for the ONE and ONLY ONE episode, in your words, that you let Sam narrate the story to give the audience his perspective, aarrgghh!!!) And one last lesson from my years in the corporate business world…The customer/buyer is always right. So please knock it off and start giving Sam the tools to bring the REAL JAMIE FRASER to life. Not your water downed milksop.
WOW! I love your comments Francesca!! You hit the nail on the head on so many levels! The bottom line is still the same – do not water the storylines down. BRINGVTHE REAL JAMES ALEXANDER MALCOLM MCKENSIE FRASER back to life as he should be!!!
Thank you, so true, and if you dare to question the egotistical writers on twitter they block you. They want only praise nothong else. Ratings will tell. And yes Cait does seem to be very distant this year.
After reading the comments here, I don’t blame her for being distant.
Agree wholeheartedly with you in this. I too only vote for Sam in competitions. Not happy with how things are turning into a one woman show. Very disappointed in producers etc.
If we stop supporting Caitriona, then it’s the same thing in reverse. Elevate both. She is a VERY talented actress – and she does not do the writing…
Francesca….you spoke the truth….and spoke it boldly!!!! Ron Moore, et al, heard the concern of the fans….but instead of factoring in this concern….they became snarky and defensive to any and all comments. Rather like the captain of the Titanic…..full speed ahead and damn those icebergs. OL production team is in danger of sinking the series whilst those of us who wish for its success keep telling them to stop gutting the book Jamie. But success cannot happen without a stronger Jamie and a less militant Claire. These characters each brought equal greatness to this love story….please don’t let infected feminism ruin it. The fans are not the enemy.
YES!THE CUSTOMER/BUYER IS ALWAYS RIGHT.WHEN WE ARE NOT RIGHT,YOU MAKE IT RIGHT FOR THE CUSTOMERS/BUYERS.I LEARNT THIS AS A PART TIME PIZZA DELIVERY DRIVER!SO LISTEN TO THE FANS AND MAKE IT RIGHT!!I WONDERED WHAT WAS HAPPENING.I WON’T SAY WHAT MY FIRST THOUGHT WAS.WHY OH WHY WHEN THERE IS A GREAT HIT OF A SHOW;DO FOLKS ALWAYS CHANGE THING?IT WAS GOOD LIKE IT WAS.
We all are aware of the me too movement but not everything needs to cater to female empowerment.
We all understand that Claire is a strong woman but it needs to be written as a strong partnership.
I agree…DG wrote Jamie as a powerfully, strong Highlander and they were a strong couple…but for some reason they are cutting much of Sam’s dialogue…just not right…I will say though I disliked them making Claire the scapegoat in that man’s murder in Ep. 7.Creme de Menthe…just to make Willoughby a stronger, more likeable character…by making and giving these other characters more air time they have changed their characters so differently from book characters…I loved the book Willoughby more…
We all are aware of the me too movement but not everything needs to cater to female empowerment.
We all understand that Claire is a strong woman but it needs to be written as a strong partnership.
As far as the Emmy panel was concerned I agree 100%
You are so right in your summation. I too saw that sneak peak and was quite disappointed in the motherly way Claire talked to Jamie. But I had been alarmed since episode 307. In 308 when Claire said she thought she had made a mistake in coming back, I was totally shocked. Jamie had very few decent scenes. Then in the recent panel in LA when Sam turned to Ron and said can I get some meatier scenes and Ron barked a curt no, I was sick for Sam. That interchange told me that Season 4 is more of the same.
Personally, I watched that panel for Your Emmy Consideration and I thought there was a very cold chill surrounding quite a few people on that stage. I do not know what is going on behind the scenes, but I believe not good. Basically, until Starz says it is renewing I truly believe it will not happen. Personally, I think it won’t, there seems to be a lot of unhappy people on that stage and distant. The extreme fans have pushed the production and the actors too far. They are tired of the chaos. As far as Sam and Caitirona ‘s parts, yes they make Jamie kind of a sad eye puppy dog at times and Claire to hard. It would be nice to see them a little more balanced on screen. Sam and Caitirona are very good as the on screen couple and if they go so will the series. I don’t give a fig what they do in on their own time, but they carry the series. So Starz, I hope will continue on. I am still willing to watch and hope they change it up for Jamie a little. I hope most of all is that what ever is going on behind the scenes they can take care of it and carry on. I have always shown my respect for all and will continue to do so. Thank you for this piece and let us have a small voice. Even if you try to have constructive opinion and be respectful on SM, people turn very quickly. Sad state of affairs for us socially.
I tend to agree with your prediction that STARZ may not renew for S5. When you think about it the creation of the Fraser’s Ridge homestead and the introduction of Brianna to Jamie could become a quite logical end point to the show. Just because the writers don’t want to hear the serious concerns about Jamie’s character doesn’t mean STARZ is unaware! With the strong discontent of its built-in fan base Outlander may be in its waning days. So very sad. But as someone else commented, Sam and Cait and Sam are firmly in my head as I read DG’s books yet again!
I think the same thing, a perfect way to end the TV series. Yes, I also picture them both when I have read the books. I firmly believe it is in its waning days. Kind of sad, it still has some potential. Who knows?
The Bree and Roger love story is like watching paint dry. When the Jamie/Claire love story lessens, the series will die.
I think the producers have made a lot of bad choices and serious mistakes (They ruined the Jamie/Claire connection in season 2 with barely any intimacy or close interaction. They have ruined the character of Jamie in order to make Claire very dominant and feminist. They have left many of Sams best scenes on the cutting room floor. And they have wasted way too much precious screen time on accommodating Ron D. Moore ‘s “Frank fetish,” going so far as to say they will waste even more time on Frank in Season 4).
In short, although season 1 was a masterpiece – the rest of it has been nowhere near as good as it should have been. Sadly.
But despite all that, I don’t believe the show will end in season 5. Because it makes A LOT of money. Don’t forget it is shown in 80 countries, not just the USA. And also, there is a HUGE amount of licensed merchandise (Outlander clothes, scarves, handbags, wines, candles, stationary, dolls, etc.). Given that Sam & Cait are supposedly contractually bound for 7 seasons – I don’t think it will end before that.
Yes, you are correct, they make a lot of money off the series and the rights and all. I wonder how much Sam a nd Cait get of this? Anyways they have made Jamie not so great. I never really paid attention until the second half of season 3. Very big difference. I really don’t know the answer to it all. I know they want to spread their wings and go, Outlander has been a stepping stone for them. I know they have separate lives and they are entitled to that and also have a right to be private about it. I also know they have strayed from the books, I have been pretty much opened minded about it but sometimes I cringe. I guess they interpret things differently when putting things together for the series. I may have sounded that I don’t want them to go on, I do but something tells me something is amiss. I really like the series and all that goes with it as much as I like the actors. So, hopefully all will go on and maybe they will change it up and give Jamie’s character what he was meant to do and say.
I think they are all exhausted. They had no down time between seasons and they do a lot of appearances and press. The crew works even more than the cast – as in year round. I think they should get a break between Seasons 4 and 5. And thank you for reiterating – I in no way said the show is ruined and won’t be returning, I just said make Jamie’s character MORE. That’s it. The show is great and so are all the people who make it. I hope it will be around a long long time…
Well done. Many emotions on this topic. I really appreciate your insight and trying to keep this comment stream on point. You will need a break, as well, after this week.
Thanks Karen, it’s certainly been an interesting week! This post has generated 45,000 views in 4 days, 350+ comments on the blog alone, + hundreds on facebook, twitter etc., and a translation into Spanish, generating its own following. It really struck a cord with people, obviously; some really agree and some really don’t. I appreciate all of the participation – especially the thoughtful, respectful comments. And, it’s been interesting to see the piece called everything from brilliant, hit the nail on the head, read my mind, to anti-feminist, damaging to women, motivated by disgruntled feelings about Caitriona being engaged to Not Sam, whining, Sam obsessed, etc. A fascinating study in the dynamics of a mostly female community! Enjoying a glass of wine just now – hope this finds you all well xo
I wish I could find again the Ron comment I seem to remember, that we ‘may’ be seeing Frank or his evil doppelganger show up in season 4. Ummm hello they are both DEAD… let them rest in piece please. Already i felt Frank had been jammed and inserted in the scrips that were made up with no relation to the book at all and taking time that Jamie should have had. Maybe I am odd but when i watch Outlander every scene that Jamie isn’t in, is a tad empty as far as i am concerned. I have read the books and reread them and Jamie is the heart and soul of the story. His love for Clare is the deepness that brings out his truth and strength, making him every woman’s dream man. I dont know why Ron feels the need to cut off Jamie’s man parts. I think someone needs to mention he may be cutting off his own paycheck. Sam is so very talented and has a fan following like no one ever has that I have seen in my 73 years. Maybe that is the problem.
Well said. And I agree 100%.
Every moment Jamie is not on screen – you want him to be on screen.
So many of his key scenes have ended up on the cutting room floor, in order to make room for unnecessary Frank scenes. So many of his actions have been given to Claire, which is truly an outrage.
And i’m frankly furious that Ron D Moore has said we will have more Frank in Season 4 !!! ??
Clearly Ron really doesn’t give a dam*n what fans want. Because there isn’t one fan on earth who wants more Frank in Season 4 !!!!!!
There was an April Fool’s joke – was it that? http://www.outlandertvnews.com/2018/04/outlander-season-four-will-have-one-episode-devoted-to-frank/
No its not an April Fools joke- Ron said in a recent interview (I think it was Hollywood Reporter or Variety) that he was planning to have Frank back in flashbacks in season 4. Which I have ranted about above. I don’t think any fan particularly wants to see that. I think they’ve already wasted too much precious screen time on Frank. (They cut a lot of important stuff, citing time constraints as the reason- but they always seem to make time for Frank!)
OK, got it. Ron loves to write Frank, for sure. I loved the Frank and Claire scenes from S3, personally – Tobias and Cait are great together – as are Tobias and Sam…
BTW- I have nothing against Tobias. I adore Tobias as an actor. I live in London and have seen him live in theatre 3 times. He is amazing. I imagine working with him is like driving a Ferrari, and Ron wants to keep driving the Ferrari.
It’s just that the pacing in Outlander is basically a mess (some things go too slowly, and some things zoom by much too quickly). They never have enough time to fully explore the key J/C relationship and key scenes. So when so much precious time is given to Frank, it distorts the rest of the season. And it seems that Sam’s scenes keep getting cut.
(Time spent on Frank didn’t bother me in season 1 when they had 16 episodes to tell the story…the whole thing had more time to develop the intensity of the central relationship and central characters. But the next two seasons have seemed very pressed for time and rushed. Resulting in the lack of that magical intensity.)
I always wonder what Sam thinks about how he is made to play Jamie/the material he is given. It is known that he studies the books and that he works with Diana to really get to the heart of the character so he knows what Jamie really is in the books. To see what Jamie is turned into on the show would have to be incredibly frustrating for such a talented actor.
I lost respect for Ron a long time ago…when he emphatically told DG in no uncertain terms that the initial craving scene was NOT going to be done in last scene with her going back through stones!!!
Ron has said since then that he regrets leaving that out. They even tried to add it back into S3. Ron is not the enemy – he’s the same guy who brought us phenomenal Season 1 – he just needs to true up the J and C characters a bit – that’s it. The show is pretty awesome IMO ?
So if Sam leaves…the franchise dies….it is a pretty simple deal. Sam uses that bargaing chip to get them bribg the show back to where it should be.
Fans needs to scream loud and long.
If the viewership drops, Ron will get a message. It IS about ratings…
After how crappy season 3 was….me watching season 4 is iffy.
I’m not sure how Sam feels – that’s between him and the production. My comments are about the character he’s playing.
Well written. We love the books because Jamie and Claire are equals. She feels safe with him and adores him. The writers don’t quite understand Jamie. Claire was a strong person but not superior to Jamie. I wish the series could give us that special feeling of this relationship.
agreed… but what do we know!
I do not agree with the notion that this is a “Claire show”… Have read every book a million times. And love the Stars production… This book was written from Claire’s point of view…
Not according to Diana Gabaldon. The structure of the book is Jamie Fraser’s story with Claire telling the story. IT IS NOT ABOUT CLAIRE. Remember who the gave her inspiration for the story. The episode of Dr. Who with the Time Traveling Highland Warrior who’s name was Jamie.
I was hoping someone would remember that young kilted Scot that gave her the inspiration to begin all this wonderfulness. and then there was Sam. A man born for this fabulous roll. Ron fell into the honeypot when that guy showed up. No one could have done Jamie better in my opinion.
Finally, someone saying something positive! Thank you.
That is so true Christine. The show would not be the success it is without Sam as Jamie. I wish Ron would wake up to that fact. Sam has made Jamie the man every woman wants and to continue to diminish Jamie might cost the show in the long run. Wake up, Ron and writers. Diana created fabulous characters. Don’t try to one-up her by changing them, thinking you’re doing a better job. Just remember the millions of book sales that resulted from her brilliant writing.
omg I totally agree , I was thinking that something was odd but couldn’t put my finger on it, they have made him like a little boy she the mom I love alpha males hope they do get our message he is a strong smart male agreed
I agree … a great example was in ep 7 Jamie delivers a beautiful heartfelt speech to Claire about coming back to him and he would give up EVERYthing just to Be with her again. She takes a breath and says I have another patient to see (her story given prominence) the Claire we know would have acknowledged such a comment
I agree with you Angie. I saw the deleted scene which showed a few more lines of their “lying to Ian” argument, and it at least showed Claire being tender to Jamie. During that episode they didn’t kiss or hug at all! I felt it such a departure from the essence of Jamie and Claire’s relationship as depicted in the books that it was jarring. The scene of Jamie bribing Fergus when he was in the brig was also a big departure from Jamie’s character. I think it is a combination of writers and directors wanting to make Claire the strong, heroic woman and that the writer’s and directors changed too often. Episodes 7-13 lacked cohesiveness in my opinion. I love the show. I enjoy seeing how they change some events, adding more layers and details, and the acting, of course, is wonderful. I hope they read our comments and know that we don’t mean them as the complaints of book purists, but as fans who genuinely want to see the show receive continued recognition and to continue for many more seasons!
THEY VERY NEVER TOUCH OR KISS ON/OFF SCREEN ANYMORE.THAT WAS WHAT ATTRACTED ME TO WATCH THE SHOW IN THE FIRST PLACE.I WATCHED PANEL/INTERVIEWS ,BEFORE I WATCHED THE SHOW-THEY WERE ALWAYS HUGGING/KISSING ON THE FACE-LIPS ETC.YOU CAN STILL HUG YOUR FRIENDS AFTER YOU GET ENGAGED.I MEAN I HUG MY HUSBAND/FRIENDS-EVEN THE MALE ONE ALL THE TIME.DOES’NT MEAN I WANNA GET WITH ANYONE.ARE THEY THAT UPSET WITH EACH OTHER?PERSONALLY,I’D READ THE SCRIPT,THEN ACT IT OUT HOW I WANTED TO.
I thought something is not right.. something is going on with those two.. that we aren’t aware of.. ????
No way? You’d think he’d married the woman that tried to have her killed or something? Mean old Claire.. 🙂
Angie, yes! And she’d only been back with Jamie for 24 hours after pining for him for 20 years! Instead of taking the time to stay with him, she’s off being a doctor. It was so frustrating.
Please, don’t encourage the anti-feminist stance that somehow Jamie is diminished by a strong Claire! There are clearly some fans (usually book purists) who complain about minor changes, but I see these objections as social commentary: they interpret the story one way and are ready to pounce on Claire’s agency as “feminist,” and they don’t mean it as a compliment. Even in the 20-odd years since the first novel was published, society has changed. It’s all right to see things a little differently. The novels are an interpretation of 18th Century life, not gospel. The critics are vocal but, if you follows multiple site, you can see are not in the majority. For some reason the trepanning scene drove some mad, eliciting complaints that the minutes Claire spent drilling into a man’s skull were a betrayal of the original material. Let the skillful screenwriters, directors, costumers, editors, and cinematographers do their work. It’s great!
The other “sites” would not allow this discussion to occur. Why I appreciate Outlander BTS for letting us vent and the courage to speak the truth.
Apologies to those who think I’m being harsh – I probably am – but I’ve been frustrated for the last two seasons about Claire and mentioning that in other forums will get you stoned (not in a good way). I think bringing this show to life is a herculean task done brilliantly by all concerned. But the subject of television Claire is tricky for me.
I don’t think this discussion is anti-feminist at all, and I have been an active feminist and a professional executive in the entertainment business for over fifty years. Clearly TV Claire is meant to be strong and often is. But she is also portrayed on the show as overbearing, controlling, patronizing and often marginalizes/dismisses Jamie with an almost parental attitude. She is this way with others, as well, because she feels superior to everyone in the ‘backward’ 18th century as she compares it with her own life in the future. She patronizes the other women in France because she feels they are simple in their bored elitist world, without ever considering that they weren’t allowed much else. She becomes frustrated with their lack of understanding of her when she could have shared some insight. Instead, she huffs out of the salon choosing not to waste her time. She ‘talks down’ to almost everyone. I don’t find TV Claire often considers why other people feel the way they feel, the origins, the context or experiences of others. It’s not anti-feminist to point that out as it’s explicitly directed toward the character of Claire in the television adaptation, specifically. I like her far more in the books I have read so far. I almost didn’t finish watching S3 after the Claire/Frank scenes. There is SO much opportunity here for Claire to be a strong example to the other female characters on the show. She was ahead of her time in her own time! But instead she rolls her eyes at everyone’s ‘stupidity’ and takes charge with the attitude that if she doesn’t no one will. That’s not a feminist message, if that’s what you’re looking for.
Well written article. Thank you.You have helped focus some feelings I had been having. I go back to the books often. I do love the tv series but have wanted to see Jamie and Claire in their marriage. Diana herself has said the story is about a marriage…a long one. I do not agree that Claire and Jamie are equals…as with any good relationship…positions of power and strength change all the time. They are a unit…they nourish each other on many levels and they also get each other out of trouble. They are a vibrant couple who continue to grow. I have missed that recently.Thank you for your article.
*sites
*that they
Yes, I have felt that they have done a horrible job of portraying Jamie as who he is in the books. No doubt Sam can handle the job, but the plot changes and writing suck. I keep telling my husband, who has never read the books that this IS NOT the Jamie of the series. It’s a shame. They have ruined his character.
Thank you, thank you, thank you! You have perfectly illustrated what so many of us have been talking about. I’m reading MOBY right now and am wondering why the show has diminished Jamie’s roll. It’s heartbreaking and has dwindled half of the show’s soul.
I cannot thank you enough for voicing fans concerns about the diminished character of Jamie in the last two seasons of Outlander. It is difficult to watch such a notable change in a most beloved character from book to screen.
It has been my experience reading the books that Jamie is very much the head of the family. Claire relies on him to make decisions and to protect her. She trusts him and when people come to her with concerns or problems in their daily life she often tells them that Jamie will know what to do and she truly believes that he will.
The people that they encounter along the way all have a great respect for Jamie. He is looked up to and highly valued. He is a highly intelligent man who has a great skill at reading people and knowing what to do in all situations. He is extremely cunning and at times very humorous.
To not see this filter through to the TV series is a real disappointment. Sam Heughan is more than capable of performing the role of Jamie that is in the books. They could not have a more skilled actor.
I am praying that Season 4 will bring about a positive change in Jamie’s character. I want to continue to watch and enjoy the series that they work so hard to produce. I want to support the TV show. There are a very skilled and hard working group of people that produce and act in this show. They deserve our support.
I couldn’t agree more. Not only have I felt the intense domination of Claire and patronizing of Jamie, but I have been none too happy about her often being a stone-cold, nasty (poor Frank!), unforgiving and often narcissistic woman. She can be smug and superior (often with Jamie) because she feels her 200 year knowledge of history (as it is written, but not necessarily as it actually was) sets her above everyone else. He accepts and respects her expertise, she does not afford him the same courtesy,, which is valuable given that he lived his life in the times they are in. The feeling I get is that the producers/writers don’t quite get the difference between a strong woman and a controlling supercilious one. I love the way Jamie is written in the books I have read so far. He’s more of a sex object (albeit a realllly good one) than a man in the show. One of the things that bothered me the most is that show Claire equates her years with Frank with Jamie’s years in a cave, prison and servitude. When he tries to tell her how it was for him (explaining his second marriage) she gives him the icy “Yes, I know”. Oh please. Not even close. In fact, that made me angry, And he just took it like an injured dog. (Okay, so he was shot, but…) I find that as I re-watch the series I’m watching the first season, the second season after the return to Scotland, and the Jamie parts of season 3, skipping the horrors of Claire and Frank. Also, I don’t like the ship episodes, with the stunning exception of Gary Young’s brilliant on board monologue. I have watched the Lallybroch episode in S3 several times, that was terrific. I’m looking forward to S4 with some trepidation, but hopefully.
Well, all these posts have hit the nail on the head. For me, Ron Moore is all about Claire and Frank. He can understand a strong woman, and Frank is a typical male, if you will, that he can grasp. But Jamie is old-school for today’s male/female issues, so to me, the producers just don’t know how to portray him. Jamie is all in the words of Diana. Just do it!
NO ONE WANTS TO WATCH A “WHIPPED”JAMIE.
I certainly agree with everything that has been said. I totally respect what the production, actors, writers and all do. The bringing to life of the books I have been obsessed with for 20 plus years has been a dream come true.
After all it could be so much worse. Kevin Costner as Robin Hood comes to mind. There was a little book I read back in the 70s called “Fair Game”. It was sold to Hollywood. They made 3 movies from that little book, and the plot was massacred in all 3 movies.
Back to Outlander. They get it right, the reunion, then they destroy it in the next episode with living in a brothel, the Ian lie, and the head drill. What happened to “dinner at Mobrey’s”, the magnets in the cellar!
And, it’s not just when Jamie interacts with Claire. Fergus has more sense than Jamie about staging a mutiny. Really!
Jamie gives a Lord John a sword to kill him. No, not my Jamie!
Lord John gets Jamie out of trouble with Leonard after the ball. Yes, I loved that scene, but it just adds to the impression that Jamie Is a lesser character. Lord John pulling Jamie behind the horse on the trip to Helwater. No, they both rode.
Each little thing seems like a nitpick in the overall scheme of things, but I hope the writers, etc. listen to our voices. Make Jamie the man he really is!
well said Leslie. illogical that Jamie would be pulled along behind lord johns horse for days. that was just plain wrong and served no extra purpose what so ever. none. he had a lot of respect for Jamie not to mention real love. so no way. that scene jerked me right out of the story.
Great examples, and I will also add to those with Jamie running behind Claire in Ep.13. They are running towards danger (Hello…insane Geillis) and Claire takes the lead in running towards the cave to rescue Ian?! Never in a million years would Jamie have let that happen. It has been frustrating to see his character diminished. Funny thing is when I saw the video of the screen tests and maybe it’s just me, but I thought, damn… there is Jamie. The potential is there for Sam to fully actualize the Jamie character but the writers have watered it down.
I think all of us book readers felt there was something missing last season. I think you have hit the nail right on the head. They are equals which at the time would have been unheard of. In today’s society we are supposed to be equals. Why not portray both characters as such. I believe this would deliver the right message. I consider myself my husbands equal. Neither of us is superior to the other. We compliment each other. As such we have been happily married for 20 years.
Very well said! I didn’t like the teaser but am hopeful it’s a blip. The story is absolutely about the couple. It’s about how they continue to raise each other up while they navigate the events of their lives. I think it is disrespectful to women and the feminist ideals to think you have to have the male lead play weaker or lesser to show the female lead as strong. I think the production team is doing a wonderful job though overall. They are human too, it must be tremendously difficult to take DGs work and translate it for television. This is an area for improvement and they are up to the challenge to present the balance that shows a truly strong couple. The movement is about all of us rising stronger together and that includes supporting those around us to rise.
Yes Patti! It’s a small input to elevate Jamie – they do an amazing job that’s not easy – and I respect them so much.
Boy oh boy! At last someone standing up for all us book Jamie fans. Having read all Diana’s amazing books, I thought it was just me being over-critical of the show’s portrayal and dreaded being viewed as a “purist” of the written word. Some of the episodes were just so “soap opera” standard and had me almost to tears of frustration at the lost opportunities for including details which would have given non-book readers a greater insight to many characters. I hope that the writers of S4 episodes realize that they really do need to give Diana’s characters the depth and understanding that she created in them.
Yep, Carrie – I am totally cool with changing minor characters and even plot changes. I only ask that they preserve the essence of Jamie and Claire – doesn’t seem like too much to ask, does it? ?
Sam Heughan is amazingly talented and deserves equal recognition. The slant towards feminism is obvious…Not against this, but not in a love story. Sadly, for me, you have hit the nail on the head which makes me sad. I have repressed my personal opinions about this until now. The books are awesome, however, the narratives of the tv adaptation have been changed way too much for my enjoyment. I expect change, but not quite so much. I am a woman, and I can assure you I do not watch Outlander to feel empowered. I prefer my entertainment not have an essence of a “political agenda” as its central theme-not remotely appealing to me. I laud Caitriona Balfe for her contributions to the series and feel she is a very talented, central character, but she does not, alone, make the show great. The entire cast does this. I am frustrated by the lack of the same and equal consideration for Sam’s and other cast members contributions and also the lack of acknowledgement and opportunities for them as well. I actually do not enjoy the show all too much now. That red-blooded, rugged, sexy, intelligent, bad ass Highlander known as Jamie has disappeared and replaced by a character barely recognizable. For this reason and so, so many more, I am moving away from following the Starz version of the series and reverting back to the books. It is becoming apparent the episodes are moving more and more towards making Caitriona the heroine and Sam the lap boy. The last half of Season 3 was almost insufferable, love scenes were so cheesy I honestly did not want to watch so I didn’t. The sex scene between Sam and Hannah James was on fire and a breath of fresh air!!! Best of the season. More consistent with steamy sciences from the past. I stopped watching half way through episode 6 and then again after two more episodes highlighting and dedicated to Claire dominating the scenes which were fairly lack-luster, I said “enough”. I truly never thought I would lose interest, but I have. I watched the series for the maturation of Jamie and Claire’s relationship through experiences together, with other cast members, and their life together as a couple. Not for predominately highlighting the life and adventures of one and not the other. Based on some of the pre-season 4 interviews about possible changes to key scenes, I might expect more of the same continued emasculation of Jamie’s character. No thanks, Starz. Not threatening to cancel my subscription to Starz, but will hold off watching Outlander S4 to see how the next season plays out before devoting time to watching. Hopefully, the directors, writers, and producers will be able to come up with a more favorable, equitable format for future episodes. I know many who feel the same way even if they do not reply. For those who remain committed, I genuinely hope season 4 is all you hope for?
Aimee I agree. Sorry to say the only reason I subscribe to Starz is to watch Outlander. Have thought about cancelling and just waiting to get the next season on DVD when available. Use to I couldn’t wait that long to begin the new season!
Aimee – I agree about the sex scene between Geneva and Jamie – holy guacamole ?
I couldn’t wait for S3. I watched the clock in anticipation. After the first few episodes, I didn’t care. I recorded them to watch later and didn’t watch them again, unlike the previous two seasons – even though the changes in Jamie’s character, especially in S2, bothered me.
Yes yes yes! The idea of “toxic masculinity” (a phrase/idea that has only really taken off in the last 5-7 years) is pervasive in our colleges and universities and pernicious in its popularity and appeal. As the mother of boys, navigating this trend in our culture has been rather difficult. As evident by the types of male characters coming out of Hollywood in both television and film, I fear that the rise of the “beta male” is here to stay. There is nothing “toxic” about men and to suggest otherwise is vile and unfair to 50% of the people on our planet. There is nothing, and I mean NOTHING toxic about James Fraser. ❤️
Kara: yes, Yes, and YES!
Kara: Thank you, I agree.
Kara – I have a son too, and I find this alarming. They cannot be celebrated for being fully who they are for fear of being too this or too that. I see it around me and I see it in Jamie!
Hi Court!
Fascinating, the many different perceptions, out there. In my mind the two (books and series) are different tangents that encompass the same story, and the more I get of either medium, the happier I am. I have to admit, I have not always agreed with production’s decisions, but I maintain, we (the viewers and readers), do not know all the decision points that go into why they chose what they did (and do). As for Jamie, I agree they sometimes fall short a bit (example: cutting as much of the Faith scene as they did…I believe it feels a bit disjointed and did a dis-service to Sam by not including). But again, we do not know all the reasons they choose what they did. I appreciate (more than I can say) that there IS a series, with such dedicated, amazingly talented people both in front of, and behind the camera, who do their best every day to bring forth visually, Diana’s amazing story. As each of us readers, devoured the books, we created a visual narrative in our minds. So too, as readers, the production team have their own visual narrative, their own vision of the story. Now, add the constraints of budget, episode time, satisfying the funding folks, scheduling and just the actual physical-ness of creating Outlander World. I just cannot get upset if I do not agree with every decision. What they create is, by far, one of the best small screen stories out there. If I need the immersion of Diana’s words…my mind’s eye of her vision… I read. Just my perception to add to the others. :-}
Thank you Leslie! I am clearly far more demanding and hard to please than you! ?(just ask my husband ?). Thank you for your comment – you are right – they have SO much to contend with, and they do SUCH an excellent job. xo
I completely agree! A perfect example is when Claire had to help Jamie kill Dougal. Check out this deleted scene where Jamie kills Dougal alone – like in the book.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4fhz7mmeRU&index=12&t=0s&list=PLfDVXH88Ao_w8zE7RJD9sk9AheX5uSzdd
What’s next? Will Claire help Jamie kill the bear? In the show it always seems that Claire is the one in charge, making all the decisions. In episode 313 as they are running through the jungle trying to find Ian, Claire is leading the way through the jungle and Jamie is following her. Book Jamie would never be following her around like a puppy dog. He would be leading the way, protecting her.
I am reminded of a passage from Voyager when Ian is first kidnapped. Jamie says “I don’t know what to do” and this is Claire’s response:
“””‘Jamie’s face was set in rigid lines, the furrows cut deep from nose to mouth. “I don’t know,” he said. “Damn me to hell, I don’t know what to do!” His hands flexed suddenly into fists at his sides. He shut his eyes, breathing heavily. I felt even more frightened at this admission. In the brief time I had been back with him, I had grown once more accustomed to having Jamie always know what to do, even in the direst circumstances. This confession seemed more upsetting than anything that had yet happened.”””””
Gabaldon, Diana. Voyager (Outlander, Book 3) (p. 489).
Please, please, please give us our King of Men back!!!
Yes yes yes! That quote says exactly what is missing!
YES YES YES!!! You are so right!!! We want strong Jamie back!!!
I completely agree with everything said here. I have been stoned and told to go home stay with the books. I hate that the producers and writers have brought us to this discussion. But they are responsible for the demise of Jamie and in turn of Claire. Making her a shrew is not empowering her as a woman nor does it make him a better man. I have loved these books for over twenty years and I want to see the t.v. series be the best it can be. . I agree that the chemistry was way off in S3, they never seemed to be excited to be together. I also missed the Mowbry Inn scene. The best moment was the fight scene at Lallybroch. But then to follow the fight just as, it was in the book was a huge mistake, huge. They rewrote the story line and it didn’t work. Can’t improve on greatness.
Laura – Thanks so much for that!!! Agree this is the Jamie and Claire we are missing.
I have to admit, I like that scene better without Claire in it! It makes me think of the boy scouts, who now have to admit girls. What about boys’ sacred tribes? They need them as much as girls need them.
Let Jamie do his thing and let Claire do hers – there’s enough to go around!
Many thanks for this honest assessment of where the adaptation of our beloved book series is going! Season one captured my heart, following the book and being so true to Diana Gabaldon’s creativity. However, since Ron Moore, found or was tasked with a new project and Matt Roberts stepped up the writing took the turn that is address so well above.
I am a feminist and have been since I was old enough to understand what it meant. What it means is that men and women are on equal footing. It does not mean women take the upper hand and humiliate their male counterparts. Feminism is about building partnerships, mindfulness and mutual respect. Some of the things Claire said to Jamie in season 3 made me want to stop watching! “I’m a doctor Jamie!” Her attitude that Jamie is just some backward, uneducated heathen makes me want to cry! That’s not the Jamie or Claire I’ve loved since the mid 1990’s when I first discovered these books.
This is no reflection on my admiration for Sam Heughan or Caitronia Balfe. They are actors playing the roles they’ve been given.
Matt is actually ground zero – he brought the books to Maril, who took them to Ron, who discovered Terry was already a fan. I think Matt gets it. I just think there is momentum behind the mentality that it’s always most important to make Claire appear strong; that is the number one criteria, and so Jamie’s character is sometimes sort of mutated in service to that (IMO).
Hello,
Sorry to disagree with your “tale” about Matt being Ground Zero!!! The “Story” that’s been shared by Ron Moore on Outlander Panels (check out the Y92 panel) is that Ron, his wife and Maril were together having dinner and started the discussion about Outlander. Terry and Maril were huge book fans and spent the evening telling Ron he need to make a series of it! No Matt what so ever.
Matt at ground zero is a spin job and a very poor one at that! I quit watching the Outlander after the Episodes; when he started doing them. What he knows about Outlander can be stated as less than Zero! Since he stepped up the caliber of Outlander has fallen. Unlike Ron, Matt lacks experience and humility to pull off this project.
Matt was the one that gave the books to Maril to read 15 years ago. He has been reading them since the mid 1990s. Several years ago Maril, Ron and Terry were discussing books and that was when Maril and Terry discovers that they were both fans of the books and that was when Ron discovered that Matt was also a fan. Please if you are going to make a statement make sure facts are correct
In reality i think Matt and the rest of the cast and crew have a better understanding then many of the self proclaimed book experts.
Thank you KC for the clarification, much appreciated. I do however stand by what I have seen and heard myself. Nothing was mentioned about who gave Maril the books or his role in doing so.
I also stand firm on my definition of feminism: I am a feminist and have been since I was old enough to understand what it meant. What it means is that men and women are on equal footing. It does not mean women take the upper hand and humiliate their male counterparts. Feminism is about building partnerships, mindfulness and mutual respect. Some of the things Claire said to Jamie in season 3 made me want to stop watching! Her attitude that Jamie is just some backward, uneducated heathen is unacceptable to me.
if this production crew wants to waive the ‘ground-breaking feminist banner’ they should adhere to what it truly is. Not fall back into the Us/Them-Win/Lose mentality. Championing women at the cost of men is not feminism!
I understand wanting to portray Claire as the strong woman she is. I am a feminist and I love Claire’s strong character. She is strong along side Jamie though, not over him. Book Jamie does not get pushed around by Claire. He is strong and stubborn. He is a natural leader; this is recognized by everyone he encounters, even his enemies. This is part of what makes Jamie and Claire’s relationship amazing, that they can be equal partners without diminishing the other, that together they are stronger. That Claire can be equal to such a great, strong man in this time period is awesome. To lessen Jamie’s greatness lessens Claire’s in the process. Claire would not be attracted to an emasculated Jamie. Yes, even strong women sometimes want the strength of a strong man. It does not weaken her character, it makes her human. Hopefully the show writers know that to truly give women power/equalization, they must keep the men strong. To think a man must be diminished to raise a woman up discredits the woman’s ability to be truly equal. I don’t think this is the message they are looking to convey, but if they lessen Jamie’s greatness then they are sending a message that Claire is not capable of being equal to a strong man, which she truly is.
WOW RareWoman – Tara! No one has said it better!!! Your comment needs to be sent directly to DG, Ron and all other writers, production team and directors! They need to realize that they can make the series as GREAT as the books are GREAT!!!
Absolutely the thoughts I had in mind. I was reading to see if someone else had the same idea and you articulated it marvellously Tara. As a strong, capable moman, it feels like a slap in the face that the writers seem to feel the only way a woman can appear as capable, strong, intelligent and courageous in their production is to reduce “the King of Men” to a shell of himself, and in doing this their love as well. The intimacy scenes for season 3 were disingenuous because of it and will continue to be so I’m afraid. Until the writers can get their heads around two equally matched yet different characters and resolve the issues the series has by missing the mark into what truly makes their partnership such an epic and ground breaking love story, I unfortunately predict viewership will drop.
Well said.
So well said – you are a RARE woman indeed! I have sent this comment to Diana x
Thank you Courtney!
I agree with most of the commentary about diminishing Jamie’s maleness. I have read the books and have faithfully watched the series.
But I must remind people that this is “show BUSINESS”. The shows must run in an allotted time and appeal to as many people as possible…… and of course make lots of money for share holders. If this years theme is “women taking back the power” then that is what is necessary to sustain the programming.
In a perfect world writing and editing would be quite different and not necessarily be influenced by outside forces.
I do think that with the enormity of the series of books, mostly the writing, costume design, editing, set designs have been done very well.
The actors have been given certain parameters to work within and have done splendidly.
I just added my 2 cents to this foray. I’d welcome any and all replies.
Linda, I agree that overall the production and all that it involves is amazing and so well-done. I will keep watching, even if there are changes made that I don’t agree with. I understand the writers wanting to empower Claire and needing to write for the times we are living in. However, it seems a large amount of viewers do not want the theme they are promoting, but rather want the characters to remain as they are because Claire is a strong woman next to a strong man. In my comments, I mentioned that I feel it is possible to empower Claire while keeping Jamie’s greatness. I think there is a great lack of understanding of what it means to make women equal and what it means to empower women. To give the message that a man must be less than to have a woman empowered actually makes for a weaker view of women (IMHO). I hope the writers and producers take the messages to heart and understand that the comments are not meant to just be critical of their work. I personally love the work they are doing and believe they want to make their viewers happy.
Thank you. Well said!
I think we all understand that this is “show BUSINESS.” However, the reason this show got off on such a strong footing and viewership was the mass built-in book reader base that launched the numbers without having to grab viewers who had never heard of OL. As far as sustaining the programming, there are massive amounts of viewers that would praise anything the writers did, good or bad, just because they want the show to continue or don’t want to hurt their feelings…so IMO, why not stick closer to the great story of the books which we all love and as they promised to do way back at the beginning.
Again, IMO, the show has been phenomenal with the eye candy presented in the magnificent sets, costumes and scenery of Scotland, but where they lag behind more and more with each season is the essence of the characters and the story. The former is beautiful window dressing keeping us mesmerized, but the storyline and characters is the soul and I think they’re starting to lose many of us. These posts show that we don’t want this to happen but it seems to be falling on defensive deaf ears who would rather believe the blind praise of their adorers than those who try to offer valid constructive criticism.
To leave a fairly short comment: I agree, I did not like the trailer for that same reason and Jamie is diminished. It’s not fair to Sam who has done such an amazing job bringing him to life for us. He’s a leading man not a supporting character. He should be written and treated as such. Thank you to everyone for all the hard work. I know there are literally millions of opinions. However, DG wrote characters we fell in love with. That’s why we watched the show. Best to stick with her characterizations.
What Lynne said.
Completely disagree with some of these comments. Claire is very often a pain in the arse and that strikes an honest chord She is a modern women who thinks she can do what she wants despite it being 200 years earlier. She goes out in dead of night, fine, but then everybody/Jamie has to risk life and limb to save her. She tries to save a man who has just tried to rape her because of her massive need to prove herself and gets everbody else into trouble with Jamie with a price on his head. She is lucky he is who he is, I feel like giving her a piece of my mind. It all makes for high drama but Jamie is very kind and a bit too good to be true. I have a lot more time for him than for Claire who seems to have ruined everybody elses life up until now. Again, great drama, 4 stars.
I agree with all that’s been said. I don’t like the way the show has diminished Jaime’s alpha maleness in season 3. They are partners in the books and need to be shown that way on screen. I hav read all the books countless times and thru all the books, the dynamics of Claire and Jaime don’t change. They both hav their own strengths and weaknesses, but together they are the greatest love story ever told. I luved that Stars wud make a series out of the best books, I’ve ever read. But to appease the political climate is a huge disservice to the series and the fans. Please bring the alpha male of Jaime back and don’t lose sight of the reason there is such a huge fan base for this series. It started with the books.
I’ve expressed my concerns before. Diana wrote Jamie as a remarkably complete whole adult man beyond his time and mature for his young years. The show has stripped Jamie of his religion, and his intellect, his astonishing memory of literature, history, poetry from his education from his well educated parents and then tutors at the castle of Leoch and then university in France. HE IS CLAIRE’S EQUAL. He is fluent in multiple languages, military strategy, and groomed to be a compassionate and gentleman Laird. The loyalty garnered from the men from the uprising and Ardsmuir was only hinted at. I realize somethings had to eliminated from the books, but not the main reason Jamie is the King of Men we fell in love with before Sam gave him a face. I keep watching, hoping the production team and writers will figure it out before real disappointment sets in.
This!
Your comments Konnie are exactly what I wished to say I also believe that if they fail to reinstate Jamie even the brilliant talent of Sam will not hold the audience who love Diana’s characters as it is only his ability to be Jamie that’s keeps me watching now.
Yes!
I felt so sorry for Jamie in the trailer. He was portrayed as a youngster, follower…NOT the fully mature, educated, functioning leader that he is in the books. What’s with that? Don’t let us down now and don’t make it impossible for Sam to stay interested and interesting. We will go back to the books. We have their faces fully in our minds now.
It’s a love story which happens to be a fully-engaged adult relationship between an Alpha male AND an Alpha female. Subordinating Jamie’s character to Claire’s ruins the whole thing. Feminism it isn’t. Feminism is equality, mutual respect and trust. That’s no longer in evidence between Jamie and Claire by the end of S3. I have read all the books numerous times and the upshot to all of it is that they rescue each equally! Period! Jamie’s disappearing and if he doesn’t show up in S4 I will be disappearing too!
The portrayal of Jamie has been confusing and disheartening. Ron has referred to Jamie as The King of Men, but they’ve yet to have Sam play him as such, cutting out or giving away the parts of the book that show why men and women respect and follow Jamie. ***Words I don’t want to say out loud: Sometimes I wonder if they do it because they (wrongly) think Cait is more likely to receive awards, which is resulting in Claire’s actions being less understandable.
I completely agree all the way around.with the concerns you have cited and expressed. For me it is JAMMF’s story as told by Claire in the books (I think Diana has said this). The TV version gives us the opportunity to see the love and marriage of these equal people from both points of view. Hoping S4 is more balanced as a couple where both partners are independent and strong is the most attractive. A domineering Claire just doesn’t work for me.
Thank you for this article. I have said as much but not as eloquently. Let the books tell the story as they were written. Murder, rape, lying, cheating etc regardless. This is an 18th century story and should not try to reflect the way things are done in the 21st. It’s called evolution.
So happy to read these comments as a book reader I find it appalling. THANK YOU!
Changing and rewriting scenes I may or may not agree with—it may be necessary for a television adaptation—-but giving lines from Jamie to Claire is not acceptable!
The worst (as mentioned) is that they lost the essence of Jamie.
Because the story is told by Claire, it tends to be seen from her view. But she is never condescending to Jamie. Perhaps the difficulty lies in portraying his 18th Century concepts and his experiences in the New World in contrast to Claire’s 20th Century knowledge of history on the screen. In the books he sometimes asks but the here and now of his place in time he remains the man of courage and leadership we know. That is the interesting conflict we enjoy in the novels. This is what I look forward to throughout the series. I also find Claire’s adaptation to life in Early America intriguing.
I found the TV Voyager very separate with the characters lives. It took 13 episodes for them to really reunite. And as they wash up on the beach, they have been cleansed of all the previous issues and ready to start anew as one. We shall see.
I like this Alma! “I found the TV Voyager very separate with the characters lives. It took 13 episodes for them to really reunite. And as they wash up on the beach, they have been cleansed of all the previous issues and ready to start anew as one. We shall see.”
I too felt like there was something missing in S3, but didn’t realize exactly what it was until so many of you have articulated it here. I too have noticed that Cait is receiving all the accolades and wondered why Sam was being left out. I too feel, when given the chance, Sam is a powerful actor. I don’t believe that his character is meant to just be beef cake for us to look at. Jamie is such a multi-faceted man with all sorts of emotions and to diminish him is a shame. I am reading the books but am only in the middle of Voyager, so I am not as well versed as some of you, but I did notice something had changed from Season 1, then Season 2 and I don’t feel it was Sam’s acting abilities, rather the material given to him. Please restore them to equality as that’s what gives the story grit. I fell in love with Outlander in Season 1 and have never reacted to a series as I have this one. It has changed me truly. The whole production is amazing and I want it to remain high in popularity because I don’t want it to go away before the story is told in full. I am buying each season as it comes out on DVD so that I can some day have the full series to enjoy for the rest of my life. Give us back our Highland man who is in love with the woman of his life. It is such a fantastic and beautiful story of two people as written by Diana.
At last, someone has articulated how I feel about the diminishing of Jamie! I love the characters of Jamie and Claire – and the amazing actors who portray them – but I hope we see a redressing of the balance between J& C in S4. The promotion of Claire is glaring. As much as I love the tv series, it’s production values and quality, it’s story has become ‘ordinary’. J & Cs story is breathtaking. Their love and the story of their marriage is central to everything as is their partnership. Their story resonates with many groups of people. When I discovered the books I felt an immediate connection with this relationship and ultimatley with the marriage it observed. This is why the Outlander is so successful- it is NOT ordinary. I know this is the tv production and not the books but I hope that ‘extraordinariness ‘ reappears in S4.
Interesting, i completely disagree with this assessment. As i remember at this point in the story we as tge reader are still experiancing the story from Claires perspective. Rarely are we allowed inside Jamies mind or see through his eyes. Jamies character cant dominate the story as long as theirs lives are being told from Claires perspective. As we move through the books i feel we gain more access to Jamies story…..
Thank you Christy – we shall see!
Totally get where you are coming from and thoroughly agree with you. I know people who have stopped watching as its getting too far from the books and yes we all know its an ADAPTATION! But there is a limit.
I too agree with this post. It seems to me that the producers do not actually understand what real feminist empowerment is all about. Women do not want empowerment at the expense of men; they dont want to dominate or control men, put them down or act superior to them. Women want strong powerful men who have no need to dominate and belittle women, because like book Jamie they are secure in themselves. They want men who value them as equals, who love, respect and share/care for them at the same time. True feminine empowerment is about being recognised as equal, albeit in different ways, but in complementary ways where their differences balance out against each other. There is not a hetero woman alive who doesnt want a deeply loving, strong man, with the intelligence, wisdom and maturity that life has taught him through conquering adversity like book Jamie has. The series is failing to deliver that very essence of Jamie, that wisdom and patience of hard won experience, which not only strengthens him but also enables him to love more deeply than ever in a way that does not disable the strong esssence of who he is. For a man to be able to love that deeply requires great strength of character and deep understanding and acceptance of who he is as a man. Loving a strong woman should not make a man weak or in any way less or subservient to her.
However, there has been a long standing trend in almost all American produced television shows over the last couple of decades (most noticeable in sitcoms eg. I love Raymond, The Simpsons) where men/husbands are repeatedly portrayed as bumbling fools and idiots, or domineering cruel and disrespectful with no noticeble wisdom, maturity or respect for women. These men do not revere women the way book Jamie does. No wonder so many modern men are lost, having been portrayed as immature idiots for years. The strong stable balanced mature archetypal male of the 1940’s -50’s has vanished. It is such a shame to see the producers failing to truly understand the desired balance within the masculine/feminine dynamic that the public wants and needs to see. Rather they are blindly jumping on the bandwagon of male bashing/feminist empowerment agenda, however subtly done, that is so clearly still out of alignment and balance.
Boom! Nailed it!
Excellent Gillian!!
I completely agree with everyone who’s said how much the characters have changed. I loved the books and have read them several times. I nearly didn’t watch the series when l saw that Ron Moore was involved. He was a producer on my all time favourite show Roswell and Outlander is pretty much going the same way as Roswell. S1 was great with the female and male leads being equal and always helping and being there for each other. The show had a massive fan base and could of probably ran for a long time. Then in S2 they idiots in charge obviously though a petite brunette couldnt really be a powerful lead so lets give the busty blondes more screen time. I still haven’t watched S3 to this day although l know every word of every episode. So after watching S1 of Outlander l was so happy how the show had pretty much followed the book. I did enjoy S2 but not as much as S1. I decided to record all of S3 to watch it all together but l still came onlone to see what was happening. After my experience with Roswell l need to know in advance what is happening. I was so sad to read what the majority were saying that Jamie’s character had become quite unrecognizable with all the changes they were making. Claire was always a strong character in the books and S1 and was on an equal footing with Jamie. So why now do they need to dumb down Jamie to make Claire look better? What they did to Roswell nearly put me off watching tv again and l swore l would never fall in love with the lead couple again. Claire and Jamie in the books were safe in my head and l was happy with the way Diana wrote them. When l heard they were going to make the tv series l got a bit worried that they wouldn’t get portrayed the same. So l can’t understand after getting it so right in S1 they are now getting it so wrong. I know l will come online again to see how things are going but as l still haven’t watched S3 and reading what people have said about the S4 trailer it looks like l will just stick with the books. I can’t go down the same road again l went with Roswell so stopping now is good for my sanity. To everyone here that are still going to watch the series l hope you get what you wish for xx
The first part of S3 where they gave us Jamie’s story during his 20 years away from Claire was great. Sam was brilliant and he got a lot of screen time, thank goodness. The problem happens when Claire comes back and we regress. Jamie on his own is phenomenal. Jamie with Claire….let’s just say that it’s not like the books!
Dawn – it’s worth watching! There will be moments that Jamie is not Jamie, but overall it’s still great x
I also totally agree
Great books & great actors .
I feel that Claires values and personality are pretty on point with the books, strong willed, defiant, a woman of the 20th century.
Jamie’s values and personality have been diminished started in S2. He is a shadow on the man in the books, not quite the Leader of men that we expect…. When the wars come he will be asking Claires permission to attend..
I am totally agree will all the comments !!! I don’t understand why they want to change the story may be because the trend on the Hollywood movie sistem goes to women’s power? They don’t need it . The beauty of this history romance is the great relationship between the two and the portrait of the two character . Good to show man as him in the books and in the show . In real life we need to have example like that!
I am a beloved book fan…I have been a beloved series fan until this past Season 3. I couldn’t put my finger on why the show is no longer attracting my obsessiveness as it did at first. Reading these comments from other fans have completely covered all the show items that have been getting to me which I couldn’t even articulate myself. Thank you for that! Jamie is the King of Men for Pete’s sake….
I respectfully disagree with your assessment of Jamie’s character portrayal in Season 3. The man has been battered every step of the way. Every thing he did or tried to do as the king of men failed. He sent Claire back to her time, expecting to die heroically…he survived. He lived ferally hidden in a cave to help provide for his family and then surrendered to preserve them. He sought to improve his fellow prisoners “lives” only to be separated from them. He managed to endear himself to the Dunsaney family only to be blackmailed. He left his son to ensure he would have a good life. He built a legit business only to have it destroyed. He maintained his loyalty to the Scots and his family with extracurricular seditious activities. By the time he washes up on the shores of America he is once again James Fraser and I am confident he will regain and rebuild his strength of character as he carves out a homestead on Fraser’s Ridge.
What of Clare? Her journey was quite different for those 20 years. She closed her heart but maintained a role as wife and mother. She successfully broke some gender barriers to become a surgeon. She made the decision to go back. Her life changes were more successful than Jamie’s, but again I think that we will see her settle in the womb of domesticity and they will be equal partners again.
Thank you Marion!!! Great perspective xo
That’s a good perspective. Let’s hope “the king of men” returns. I did not like the scene where they are running through the jungle with Claire in the lead. I’m a “strong “ woman married to a “strong “ man and there is no way my husband would have let me do that.
Once again, you were right Marion! However, I think this has to do with more than just the story… xoxo
Don’t stone me, but I am just sick of this argument.
In this version, a snippet of a scene is analyzed to the end that Jamie is Claire’s puppy dog. She does know about the question, you know. The fact that he asked it doesn’t make him unmanly.
Perhaps they should write a scene where they all get lost and Jamie refuses to ask directions.
Or comes home and asks Claire what she’s been doing all day, and why wasn’t she waiting with his Scotch when he got home.
Or he could escape from the cabin and go play golf. Very manly. And Scottish!
Separate entities, quote from the author. If you have such a problem with the character, you can choose not to watch. I say that with the utmost respect. It makes me truly crazy.
I am quite sure this is one I should have scrolled past because mine is an unpopular opinion, but there. I said it anyway.
Debbie
Thank you so very much for this commentary…I AGREE with you 10000%….Absolutely sick to death of the complaining.
The Outlander series is told from Claire’s point of view for the most part…therefore more often than not SHE is the story teller…guess many seem to forget this with all of “Jamie/Sam” worship. There is absolutely no doubt of Sam’s acting ability, nor Cait’s, but by endlessly “objectifying”, many are now taking away from what is a brilliant story…..and that is fair to NO ONE.
Jamie is not the weaker one…nor is he anyone’s puppy….their differences are what draws one to the other…NEITHER of them are weak..they are different and at the same time they are the same. We see Claire’s weaknesses…and we see Jamie’s weakness…just because a character sometimes shows sensitivity or weakness does not mean they are weak. Also Culldoen and its aftermath would have no doubt changed Jamie…that should also be taken into consideration. After Culloden, his life was left in ruin, so there is NO doubt he would have been left a “changed” man.
Quite frankly, the books are wonderful…the show is wonderful…and what many seem to endlessly forget, we can choose to watch…or we can choose NOT to watch, the choice is ours.
Rather than constantly looking for negatives…why not be thankful…our favorite books have been brought to life, we have some wonderful actors portraying those characters
The actors are WONDERFUL in their own right …so why the constant need to “play one off the other”??? My opinion will no doubt be unpopular, but as someone who has read the books numerous times, and endless watched ALL episodes over and over…I am just thankful for what we are seeing come to life…ALL THAT IS OUTLANDER.
Hi Tracey: I love your comment – I have submitted a few comments about the show and an uneasy feeling I have about the way it has gone – but as you said “The books are wonderful and the show is wonderful”. Sam’s and Caitriona’s acting is brilliant and we have them to think for giving us Jamie and Claire. The life of an actor/actress is not an easy one – trying to please the fans, the directors/producers, etc. My hope is that both Sam and Caitriona keep on with their awesome acting and not let any of us get in the way. I love all the “Outlander” 8 book series, and am in the process of reading “Drums of Autumn” the third time, (as I have the first three books). I love the Show as well. I have the DVDs/Blue-Rays of both Seasons 1 and 2, and have rewatched them over and over. Can’t get enough of them. I am now waiting for the DVD/Blu-Ray of Season 3 “Voyager” to come out April 10th and will be the proud owner of that one as well. I am looking forward to Season 4 this coming September. As you said, again, “Why not be thankful …. our favorite books have been brought to life”. Thank you for your comment – let’s keep the positives going on this one.
?????Love it – thank you Debbie!!
Agreed! Can’t we just enjoy the show and not pick it apart? So much amazing stuff happening all the time. I can’t stop watching Season 3! I think it was great!
Thank you Courtney for your powerful post; I truly hope that it resonates with the necessary executives so that this series can be saved. I read that Sony wants to bring more series based on books to air, and that this is their first attempt. Well, I happen to think that bringing to actual book to the screen, and not a 2017/18 cultural modification of that book to air, is a big part of the problem here (Chris Parnell, please hear the concerns we are raising!).
I fear that Ron, Maril, Matt and Toni have misread Diana’s works, and do not grasp what has drawn readers to them for decades; they are re-interpreting and revising her works for viewers based on the current cultural zeitgeist — not because it is applicable, but because it makes Outlander seem more relevant and topical. But the original Outlander, as written by Diana, raises important issues which are being overlooked in the current climate; Diana’s story if brought to the screen as-written would be a provoking thought leader. Outlander is currently a missed opportunity for a rich discussion about the equal partnership of strong women and strong men. As it stands, it feeds a cultural misandry — disappointing and distressing to say the least.
While the production direction — which includes poor writing, the addition of useless story arcs (Claire in the Jungle and brain surgery with a hand drill) — is responsible for much of the destruction of Diana’s love story between two equals, acting skill is also at issue, and I refuse to shirk from naming it. As someone who is fluent in three languages, I know that one of the most difficult aspects of communication is nuance; only when one is truly adept at nuance in a foreign language can one be said to be truly fluent. When Ms. Balfe is able to act vehemently when strong emotions are required, she is lacking the skill and experience to deliver nuanced and multilayered performances which illuminate and give depth to the script. Same Heughan is superlative in this respect — with even the small morsels he is given, he illuminates and sculpts Jamie. For example, that little scene in A. Malcolm done in profile, where Jamie tells Claire that she always came to him when he needed her most — Mr. Heughan imbues that tiny scene with twenty years of longing, grief, desperate hope, physical privation, loneliness, undying love — there is a palpable visceral quality to his work — it is subtle, but packs a powerful punch to the gut. It is heartbreaking to see how much of the character he creates and pours his craft into winds up on the cutting room floor… he must be frustrated indeed, because he seems to have no control which of his words will remain. In contrast, Ms. Balfe is given most of the juicy script, most of the power, but is not able to create such magic — her face is largely immobile, her eyes should wide open and unmodulated, her utterances serve as her force. She powers those words through, untempered. This works when there is a singularity to her scene — a pure and simple purpose — but few scenes benefit from such interpretation. Thus, her Claire is tonally flat, and increasingly unsympathetic. As a viewer, I am left wondering why she came back to be with Jamie, why she came back to the 18th Century at all. In the hands of a more experienced and sensitive actor, even a compromised script may have yielded a more balanced and less single-minded Claire. I have grown to dislike series Claire, and have to remind myself that book Claire is funny and appealing.
I hope it is not too late to save the series from this misguided interpretation of Diana’s works; the first season was tantalizing in its promise… Sam Heughan is too perfect as Jamie, the King of Men, too talented, to squander on the version of Jamie that Ron, Matt, Maril and Toni are giving us. Please consult more with Diana, stay true to the Jamie and Claire of the books, and re-shoot any and all scenes from series 4 that fall short; any more of this weak and wishy-washy Jamie and obnoxious Claire, and fans will lose heart. Oh, and give us back the passion and the sex of the books too.
Thank you, Monika Doe, for so eloquently stating what I think and feel about this shiw. Your assessment of the two lead actors is spot on. I hope the writers and producers read this article and the comments and make the necessary changes to get back on track.
Thank you, Courtney for writing this powerful article.
This is beautifully put and I completely agree. I have always said that Sam’s acting is nuanced and layered and he can convey a multitude of emotions with one look. Cait, on the other hand, cannot. She tends to plow through her scenes rather than use subtlety to her advantage, like Sam does. It makes it hard to watch. Yet, she gets award after award. I just don’t get it. Maybe Sam is so subtle and nuanced that he gets overlooked? My husband saw one scene between the two of them and immediately commented that he could never watch because Claire’s character is so distasteful. I have to agree. While I keep watching in hope that they will finally make Sam/Jamie an equal to Cait/Claire, it gets harder all of the time.
Agree one hundred percent for precisely the same reasons. “Claire” gets harder to take with every episode. I almost quit after the S3 Boston episodes, and she was so critical of Jamie on her first day back that it made sense when he asked her why she came back. I had that same thought. Also, I didn’t believe a word of her finding it hard to leave Brianna. Just outright bad acting. Sorry.
Bravo Monica for addressing the elephant in the room, namely the acting skills of the two lead actors. I whole heartedly agree with your assessment, particularly about Ms Balfe. I too find series Claire way too harsh and wooden in her performances, lacking the necessary emotional nuances. Much of her speech comes across as too forced and much of her character just grates and often makes me cringe. Sam on the other hand is delivering brilliant heartfelt and beautifully expressed emotive acting. I bought the DVD series and lent them to my daughter, who doesnt have the time to read the novels at present, and her first comment about them was that she thought that Claire’s character was bloody annoying and not very likeable at all.
For me the elephant in the room is Sam’s talent is not on the same level as Caitriona’s. I think she is extremely talented and apparently the industry agrees with me!
I believe her beauty has carried her a lot…. and she should perhaps in her down time take acting lesson.. I’m not trying to be mean but if I was a new actor and wanted to go further I would..
Sorry but I disagree Caitriona is a superb actress and it shows! Not her fault that Sam is not at her level!
Cat is a great actor, but so is Sam, they are just cutting out much of what Jamie says in book, ie “Faith…Cat got all the lines and they CUT all of Jamies out and made it all about Claire’s loss…Sam acted well and they cut it…a loss of a child is a loss/grief for 2 people not one…They have to stop deleting great scene’s and start including them both in these scene’s.
I’ve seen Caitriona grow and stretch into a phenomenal actor through this series. It’s been a masterclass for her!!
I think they are both excellent actors. We fans are SO LUCKY to have them both!!!!
But even a great actor can’t fix bad writing. Jamie & Claire were both written incredibly badly in S3 ep6 (Creme de Menthe). Almost every word that came out of their mouths was totally “off.”
Overall Claire is written much better than Jamie. But even with Claire the writers have room for improvement – as she often comes across as shrill and arrogant. I can only assume it’s this “feminist heroine narrative” they seem to be pushing- making her too aggressive and him too weak. They also make her seem much older than him- even though it’s only a 5 year age gap.
I disagree about Caitriona! I think she’s brilliant.
Agree 100%…
Monika, Iove your take on it here, but would like to add another piece to Jamie that I think sums it up. They have turned Jamie into Sam eye candy. The worst part of the whole season was in the reunion – the brothel scene – where they had Sam move naked to the table and had him lit by the candle. I thought that was a total insult to Sam and his acting ability. I believe these types of scenes are one of the major reasons Sam has been passed over for awards. Nobody takes him seriously.
I have also listened to many of the producer’s podcasts. During S1 and S2 they were giving over the top raves to the acting of Cait and Tobias and rarely mentioned Sam except to say he “did a nice job” on that scene.
Somewhere in an Outlander site I read someone’s comment that Ron Moore does not like Sam Heughan. I found that most unbelievable until I listened to his podcasts. Not only did he lavishly praise Caitriona Balfe and Tobias Menzes, but also the actors portraying Leoghaire Mackenzie, Ned Gowan, Murtagh, etc. (who were fabulous), and others when they showed in a scene. It was well into the second season before he made any favorable comment about Sam Heughan. His wife was the one who praised Sam. I have enormous respect for everything Ron has done for the show – he is the impetus behind the series and I thank him for it. But this one point is puzzling. There must be another explanation.
Monika, I agree with a lot of your comment, but I have to disagree about Cait’s acting. I think she’s fabulous. I think Sam is very talented too.
I liked Claire in the jungle! Just sayin’
On DGs Facebook there is a discussion about what S3 scenes were favourites and which were not so liked. Again a decent discussion. A lot of Sam’s scenes as Jamie ( Culloden, prison, Willie) were rated very highly as excellent acting. The jungle and skull drilling scene were not really very popular. And the changes made to Jamie’s character were also listed there.
I am sorry to have to strongly disagree with you about Ms. Balfe”s acting abilities — it took me three tries to get past the first 35 minutes, replete narration that made me cringe (Vanessa Redgrave’s narration in the series Call the Midwife shows how it should be done). But we shall agree to disagree on that score.
However, I have to speak up and say that the Claire in the Jungle scenes are a prime example of what is diminishing the series. My 14 year old daughter, a strong and outspoken young woman typical of her generation, has done wilderness camping for the past 6 years. She goes for month-long canoe trips with 5 other girls and two counsellors in the Canadian wilderness. She literally chortled at the Claire in the Jungle segment, pointing out how lame Claire’s survival skills were — she couldn’t master camping 101, and would never have been allowed on my daughter’s canoe trips. She kept saying — how could she have been a WWII field nurse without basic survival skills? How could she have boasted about the skills she gained from traipsing around far-flung digs with Uncle Lambert? It was just silly! But the snake took it to a whole new level — even without cracking a book or checking on google, my 14 year old knew that such snakes did not and do not exist in Haiti, or elsewhere in the Caribbean. That snake scene was treating Outlander viewers like fools.
I thought “Claire in the jungle” diminished the character of Claire, and diminished the series. It made both ridiculous.
OK Monika, you got me on the snake scene. I thought the ants scene was great, but now remembering back, when she woke up with the snake I remember thinking that was a bit cheesy. I did buy that Claire was pretty miserable and lost, but the snake was a bit over the top.
I really didn’t remark it at once but season 3 finished annoying. What have they done with this strong man Jamie? I don’t want to see the story of a superwoman but of an educated leading man of the 18th century.
As someone who came to the books because of the series, I agree with what you’ve said.
I agree with the sentiments expressed by the author of the original comment. As a reader and writer of fiction, I am especially pleased with how DG balances the strength and weaknesses of both main characters in her epic. She follows through with this skill in her depiction of the relationship between Roger and Brianna as well. I too have felt that, in the series, Jamie has been short-changed in this regard as well. As we progress into the North Carolina story, Jamie’s character deepens. He struggles with his identity as an 18th century man and the influence of the strong 20th century women who are at the center of his world. THEY change him, where he can be changed. THEY force him to override his 18th century norms and instincts (e.g. coming to terms with Brianna’s out-of-wedlock pregnancy). In some instances, love of his wife and daughter overcome societal norms, (the pregnancy and marriage) in some cases it does not (revenge-taking over Claire’s kidnapping and rape). His is the story of a man evolving past innate patriarchy because his love and intellectual capacity cause him to rise above the dogma of his cultural programming and religion. Isn’t this the positive take-away we, as women are hoping for in our current drive to finally break the chains of patriarchy that have held us down for more than a millennia?
I am hoping that the talented people involved with advancing the script in Season 4 recognize the power of Jamie as a surrogate for all the men in our lives who are honestly struggling to unseat the patriarchy that holds their wives, mothers, daughters and female friends/colleagues in thrall. THAT would capture the sentiment of our current cultural climate a lot more than creating strong feisty women with a backdrop of weaker male ones. Isn’t this the theme that drives the characters and plot forward in the books? Isn’t this at the root of DG’s phenomenal success with her series? Why not ride THIS wave rather than rendering it down to a conflict of strong, evolved women struggling in an environment of un-evolved men. Let Jamie’s (Roger, John Grey and Ian, for that matter) express their confusion, victories and defeats.
Let Jamie’s character out of the can, let Sam’s acting skills flourish. Perhaps then he will win the acknowledgement of the industry and peers that he so richly deserves.
Whoa! So well written and thought provoking. I want to read your fiction!
Bravo Cathy!!! Toss us some of your book titles, lady!
Yes – boys and men need leadership OUT of the patriarchy – Jamie is the perfect character to take them there…
This is a missed opportunity for men of this day and age to show” What a man is” and that’ s not an easy thing to be. (as DG has said)
Can’t believe that men are not shouting this from the mountain tops,”‘ we are relevant.
For such a time as this. Stand up men. Show us your worth. Write this show with a strong man. The way it was initially written.
Thank you DG for showing us this man.
So much truth here! I’ve been “complaining” about this from moment one. Each season I hope and yet each season I’m disappointed as Jamie grows weaker and Claire stronger. This statement from Nadine rings so true. “We’re all believers that men and women are equal. One’s strength (Claire, in this case) should not diminish the other’s (Jamie) – and vis versa. This is the essence of the entire story.”
Are we only strong when men are weak and if so are we then strong at all?
Our “King of Men” has been castrated by his own Queen. What a shame.
Sent a tweet to Diana, who should be able to explain?
Thank you for your thoughtful and respectful critique. Diana’s stated intent was to write a story of a long loving marriage that lasts the test of time. Everyone involved in this production has done a wonderful job of bringing the books to life but I do wonder sometimes if they have read all the books or do they understand what a strong marriage is. I do not know if it is possible to convey the love that this couple has for each other to the screen but to do this you need both of the characters to be developed fully or the story becomes just another adventure with love interests. Sam does an exceptional job with what is given to him – he is Jamie. However, Jamie is a strong, intelligent (mentally and emotionally), God fearing man, whom was born to be a leader. In my opinion the writing and editing need to reflect this more. It is as if they are afraid to depict the strength of what a man is for fear it would take away from the strength of what a woman is. I wonder if anyone understands anymore what Diana does; a strong, protective, caring man can only make a strong woman stronger! A strong marriage is about a partnership not a competition. ❤️
I agree with this article 100% and have been concerned about this change since the very beginning. Very soon into the show we saw Claire take on a Super Woman persona, coming up with Jamie’s ideas from the books and being the mastermind behind most all of their actions and in some cases literally doing Jamie’s actions from the books (i.e., stabbing Dougal). He quickly became a side kick and not a partner to the woman he loves. To be honest, I watch show Claire and wonder what Jamie sees in her. She’s bossy, bitchy, constantly gets them into trouble and doesn’t let him be the man we know he is from the books. What made me fall in love with book Jamie is his intelligence, his ability to lead, his compassion for others. Instead, on the show, we get a follower who looks with doe-eyes at his wife. I am a huge book fan and LOVE Sam as Jamie and was happy with his casting choice from day #1. When he is allowed to shine, such as in the first part of S3, he is phenomenal. However, the second Claire came back into the picture, it all went by the wayside. I want to love this show, but it gets harder every episode as they continue to erode the Jamie character. If the show watchers could only know the Jamie the book readers know, they would be baffled by the changes that have been made. Thank goodness we always have the books to re-read!
Hallaleuah! I thought it was just me. After watching Season 3, I thought, what is happening? I didn’t like what I saw. So thank you everyone. I love Outlander and have read all the books. So looking forward to see Season 4 and an improvement. So love Sam and Caitriona . They are both spectacular actors.
I agree wholeheartedly with your observations and, at the risk of upsetting Matt, Toni et all, hope that S4 will portray Jamie and Claire more like Dianna has fleshed out their characters in the books. It’s a beautiful show but sometimes it hurts to see Jamie portrayed as less.
In the books Jamie has savage blood — I think his strength has been down playes some. In the books the wildness of Jamie is just as important as his being an educated officer — if not more– He is kind but he is also ruthless and stuborn– I wish he was rougher as he is in the books
Cait is a gifted actress and the story is written from her character’s POV. Sam is also gifted. It does seem that, for whatever reason, Production eliminates great Sam moments from both the show and awards consideration. A valid concern also addressed by others and will, no doubt, be taken seriously by “Himself”. My deep admiration and appreciation for the high-quality production value and, of course, Diana for the reason we are having this conversation. This is an adaptation from print to screen. Some page events do not translate to screen as readers might want. Two entirely different mediums. People! Stop nit-picking. We all love Outlander. Maybe not every single scene or the occasional story-bending pleases everyone but, as is, what a great ride. Go with it. Sam can take care of himself. It’s a job. A great job. Since he seemingly has no ego and looks forward to many more Jamie years – he’s fine and dandy with his job. Outlander is not, should not, and I don’t want a commentary on current climate regarding equality. Nothing about Outlander is current. At best in the 1960’s and the other best is the 18th century. This production is brought to us with the very best talent from Showrunner to behind the camera and beyond. Stop whining or it might just go away. We’ve got six and maybe seven more seasons to enjoy. It’s fun. It’s a fantasy. Be kind.
I worked in the industry for many years and I can tell you that shows do NOT go away because fans whine or seem “unkind”. Shows go away when fans stop watching. These comments are a message to the producers from the people who feed them (bad ratings = no advertising dollars). Perhaps they should consider it a little when the people with the remotes are collectively sending a message.
I don’t think it’s feminism that is causing this, it’s weak writing and story choices. The writers think the King of Men is a joke. The Jamie of the books is too good and needs to be brought down a few pegs. I am not a fan of this choice. After being reunited in a most beautiful way the Frasers spend the next two episodes sniping at each other and wondering why they belong together. After a humorous sex scene in episode 9 everything is supposed to be fine. Spend most of the next two episodes apart, go to a ball where they are separated again, race to save their nephew, and are swept away again. At least they were swept away together this time. One of my favorite things about Jamie is his articulate way of sharing his love to Claire. He has many beautiful speeches, many outpourings of feelings, and many passionate utterings in the books. That is all but missing in S3. If I only watched the show I would honestly wonder if the main couple has much more than a sexual relationship together. Jamie needs a champion for his character in the writers room. With Anne K gone, I fear he has no one left. While I find the scenery of the show beautiful and well made, the story itself has not matched the high bar set in the first season. S4 is a chance for Jamie and Claire to rebuild their life, to have a home and reunite their family, to be able to love one another every single day. I believe that sometimes the hard working people making the show have lost the forest through the trees. The foundation of Jamie and Claire is the basis for everything around them. They need screen time as the strong, loving, and equal relationship they are. I know Sam and Cait can deliver it, will the show let them?
I am sorry but I disagree. I am a book reader first and foremost and have been reading these books since the first 1 came out in 1991. And I will say this Claire is the reason that I have read the books many times over. Are there times I want to smack her..yes of course there are because she is written as a real person with flaws and all. Jamie for me is written as a character that is two perfect and no flaws, sort of like the way harlequin romance male characters were written years ago. So most of the time I don’t really care what he is doing. So for the series the characters to me have for the most part remained true to the characters in the book. Now having said that there are times I don’t agree with what they have done in the show but I prefer to sit back and see if there is a reason they have done it. Sometimes it is revealed and sometimes it isn’t. An example of that is what they did to Claire’s character during the first half of season 3. They made her into a villain and that still pisses me off! My Claire would have never given Frank permission to have a mistress and then be all angry when he did! In the 2nd half of the season things picked up for me again. In the books Diana sort of made the reunion look like they weren’t appart for 20 years but were only a part for the length of time it takes to make a ham sandwich! So for me the show played that more true to life.
As for Caitriona getting awards and nominations and Sam not. Well here is my take on that and it is probably going to get me some negativity. Caitriona gets awards and nominations because she owns her role and has the talent to back it up! Sam at times seems like he is phoning it in and would rather be working out. And I have felt that way since season one. There are times that I think yes he is going for it and going to knock it out of the park and then…nothing. An example of this for me is when he is leaving Willie. It started out good for me then it was like he lost the emotion of the scene. Even if as some say the reason that Sam doesn’t get awards and nominations is because they give all the good lines to Claire were true, if Sam were as talented some think he is he would own what he is given and BRING IT. For me he doesn’t and for me his talent is not on the same level as Caitriona’s and some of the other actors on the show.
Anyways these are just some of my thoughts.
Karen! The ham sandwich made me laugh! And everyone doesn’t have to think Sam is a brilliant actor – they just have to keep it respectful. I was entertained by your comment – thanks
I can’t say it better or more thoughtfully than so many of you have, but I certainly agree. The OL books are about a marriage, as told by Claire. She does not make herself the primary character and indeed does everything to celebrate her beloved husband, Jamie. I realize the series is a different version than the books, but it is now becoming a different story. They have gutted too much of Jamie’s essence at the expense of transforming Claire into an unrecognizable and unsympathetic character. There is a real disconnect between the vision of marriage as portrayed in the books and the one on the series. Strong, committed marriages cannot endure if one spouse dominates, is condescending, or distainful of the other. In portraying Claire in this fashion, she is hardly a “strong woman”, and has been weakened to a shrill, petulant person. Taking away much of Jamie’s essence has done the same to Claire. The production team would be well-advised to read these comments and take the feedback seriously. OL fans don’t love the books/series because Claire is the dominant character. They love it for the beautiful love story between two incredibly complex characters who strengthen each other. One without the other is not whole.
Diane, I really like these last 2 sentences that you wrote: “They love it for the beautiful love story between two incredibly complex characters who strengthen each other. One without the other is not whole.”
I have never responded to anything on the computer before so please bear with me. Today I kept this page open until I could read every ones thoughts. First let me say thank you to Diana Gabaldon for your beautiful Outlander book series. They helped me get though a very sad time in my life. Thank you Ron Moore and everyone who is a part of this of this wonderful TV series that I will never stop watching as long as Sam and Caitriona are a part of it. I do agree there is such a loss of the essential character of Jamie . I don’t understand the need to give Claire Jamie’s lines. Voyager pg. 260 (” Dinna be afraid, (” he said softly.”) “there’s the two of us now.”) The one thing that broke my heart the most in this series and I feel was the beginning of the down fall of Jamie was in season 2 where they made it clear that Jamie knew what Laoghaire had done to Claire and she told him to forgive her. He didn’t know this until long after they were reunited. Jamie Fraser would have never married Laoghaire or forgiving her for that. In my mind that was one of the biggest mistake made in the series and there was no fixing it. I think everyone should go back to S1-E9,at the very end (Inside The World Of Outlander) , where Ron Moore said ,(What once was Claire’s story now becomes Claire and Jamie’s story). Ron please give us back that story.
Very nicely put Diane!
Finally!! I have started to lose interest in the TV series for precisely this reason. Sam is almost exactly how I pictured JAMMF when reading the books and the writers nailed it the first season. But taking away Jamie’s personality to show Claire as a superwoman almost makes me ill. Jamie and Claire are two sides to the same coin, and making Jamie into less of the badass Scottish warrior that he is takes away from Claire’s character. I’m not as excited about the next season, and I swear if the writers screw up the Bear Killer story, I will quit watching and go back to my beloved books
I agree with the standpoint that Courtney Williams has taken in this article. I have watched every episode of Outlander several times each, & I am reading the books alongside the current, corresponding seasons. I love Claire’s strength, & most of the time, her unwillingness to change her stance; but I am also in love with how safe & secure Claire feels with Jamie, more so in the books. Jamie & Claire have both been through so much apart & together, & they look to each other to come up with solutions; & they should show this more in the tv series. I love the idea of the couple of Jamie & Claire being completely EQUAL & so intertwined that they are only distinguishable as one unit.
The writers of the tv series have spent countless hours & have dedicated themselves to writing this series, & I commend them for their undertakings. I hope they continue this dedication while drawing as equally as possible on both the strengths of Jamie & Claire. Each builds the other up. 🙂
Monica – yes! Thank you x
Yes, yes, yes! Thank you for writing this. I also came to the books after watching seasons 1 and 2. Book 3 was one of my favorites, but the second half of the season totally missed the mark. So much so, I almost don’t even want to watch anymore, though I love Sam and Cait. I hope the strong, intelligent, compassionate Jamie of the books shows up in season 4!
This is exactly what has happened. The show decided to go in a direction of making Claire into a super feminist and Jamie this somewhat easily led love interest of her’s who seems clueless . I totally agree and have been saying this all along season 3. I will also add that Matt Roberts never takes any criticism he gets angry and not everyone is rude as he likes to think they are and I have seen this play out on Twitter. Look they are re-writing what has been already so well written. I don’t want to hear about the people who say “It’s a adaptation” We know this were not stupid people. However they could have left in John and Claire ship scenes instead they chose to ADD nonsense with Frank and Candy which never was in the books to start with. It has made me dislike Claire who was wandering around a jungle for 20 min and the first thing out of her mouth is ” I am a Doctor” ? really? Too much adding and not enough adaptation . I will not buy season 3 nor will I watch it again. Season 4 is my make or break. If they don’t get this story back on track then I am done with the show . That is just the way it is. I have the books and that is enough and I don’t blame the actors it is the writing and direction.
I think it’s REALLY important that the producers, Diana and Sam get to read this post and all the comments. Whether Ron likes them or not, he needs to see them. Someone who knows someone needs to make sure they do. If this has become all about pushing Balfe into the limelight for awards (is that why they’re doing separate interviews now, I wonder), it’s a slap in the face to all of us. No fans, no ratings. No ratings, no pickups. If she’s making demands now that she has nominations (or thinks better things are on the horizon for her) she needs to be careful, because historically that hasn’t always worked well for people who bail on hit shows. just saying. There’s too much we don’t know.
I’m afraid that Ron won’t care what the fans are saying El. We tried telling him and the other producers on Roswell that they had changed the two lead characters from S1 to people that were unrecognizable by S3. After campaigning to save the show from being cancelled at the end of S1 and S2 we didn’t even try with S3 because it was so bad. When we complained in person to Ron Moore and the other producers we were told to “Go watch reruns of Mary Tyler Moore instead if you don’t like it” We stopped watching after that and Roswell was cancelled after S3. They really should realise that it’s the fans that keep the show going.
Well, it’s their show, to do with what they see fit. Life is long and we learn from it – Ron is on his own journey too, let’s see what happens…
El – Caitriona is a pretty fabulous person, and I highly doubt she is making demands for nominations! Back to the point – just expand Jamie’s character to match Book Jamie, that’s it. Please don’t disparage Caitriona…
You hit the nail on the head for me!!! I also couldn’t exactly put my finger on what was missing between Jamie and Claire’s relationship. And you’re right. He has become a second to Claire and “her” story instead of her story about Jamie and their amazing journey together as soul mates. I enjoyed season 2 a lot because of the characters, settings, and costumes. But I find myself going back to season 1 and watching it over and over again. It portrayed the essence of Jamie and Claire’s relationship truer to the books than the last 2 seasons. I am looking forward to season 4 but hope that the portrayal of the relationship of these 2 gets back to the true story.
Completely agree. Series one was outstanding, breathtaking and the characters and relationships were riveting but series three I found there was something missing. I feel that it was time, everything seemed rushed at the expense of character and relationship building. The character of Jamie, I feel, was not given the time to show his strengths and maturity,same with the relationship with Claire and Jamie, I found that their relationship just is not the same, it’s just not there as there isn’t the time to believe in it. It all feels so rushed and it’s really impacting pace of the show. I miss Jamie and I miss the incredible show it was in series one. The wedding episode I feel is a prime example of time and pace at it’s best. Everything made sense. Jamie young, naive but still strong and masculine. Not a sideline!
I so…so hope… it finds it pace again. Building on the relationships which we are all invested in. I wish I could go back to series one again and experience it all over again
Please that both our (I say our because I have been reading since 1990s) characters remain strong because if there was no Jamie strong , and equal, there would be no magic!
This so beautifully expresses my frustration with the show. Jamie and Claire in the books are a matched set. Both strong, intelligent, stubborn. One does not take a back seat to the other. It is a primary reason, I think, that Frank and Claire could not work. Frank the older professor in the relationship did not value the strengths in Claire the way Jamie does. After having a marriage of equals Claire could not go back to the role she had played in her first marriage. I think the point you bring out is obvious in the recent panel presentation for the Emmy nominations. The highlights failed to show snippets of some of Sam’s most outstanding scenes in season 3. His silent acceptance of death on the battlefield, hIs guilt over the injury to Fergus, the interchange between Willie and Jamie when Willie is Christened, the tender moments with Mary McNab when Jamie found his humanity once again or with wee Joanie as he tries to explain the differences in his relationship with her mother than with Claire. So many beautiful moments season e. But they were sure to show Tobias in the small role he played in season 3 expanded for television, and to capture the most impressive Claire moments. I think this reflects their thinking about the heart of the show. The focus on Claire at the expense of Jamie and on strong woman at the expense of the relationship at the true heart of the books.
In spite of all your observations and concerns, this is the best damn show on television. Rather than pick it apart and wish away for perfection or wanting it to be just like the book, I’d rather give kudos to everyone who works on this show. From the acclaimed acting, set design, costume design, musical soundtrack, production editing, directing to well the list goes on and on. I venture to say most of us have no idea what goes into producing a show of this caliber. So they have to change things around somewhat. And, yes I’ve read all the books.
I have been watching tv and movies and watching entertainment shows for 50 years now and this is THE best show that I’ve ever watched and I’ve watched every episode at least 10 times. Sure, there has been some episodes that could have been better but I don’t really care to critique them because it doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things. I believe this show is going to be picked up for Season 5 and beyond. I also believe because it’s such a big hit they are negotiating contracts and other matters.
I wish only good thoughts to everyone involved with the production Outlander because they deserve only the best. Hoping for some Emmy recognition this year for Sam and Cait and everyone else involved. Sam is a real sweetheart (met him last year) and I am looking forward to meeting him again along with Cait in August.
Totally agree, Susan!! Love this show and everything about it!!!
?
I’m glad, I’m not the only one who was shocked to see Jamie’s roll diminished in season 3. I had to stop and rethink if I missed an episode where Jamie had a severe accident that resulted in a brain injury. Season 1 & 2 I watched numerous times due to the strong male and female characters; the strong supporting characters and the locations for all the episodes. Season 3 I made myself endured to the end. My hope is that season 4 , returns to the format of characters seen in S1 & S2, if NOT , I will not waste my time watching and return to reading the book series.
Hooray! Thank you for bringing this change to the forefront. Those who have not read the books do not know the equality and partnership of the Jamie and Claire. Your kind thoughts are most appreciated.
My interest waned a bit during season 3. I missed Jamie. Remembering an earlier scene when he said his calling in life was to be a man. I want to see him mature into a wise elder, without Claire overpowering as the alpha. Perhaps we’ll see that in season 4. Not so sure. I am re-watching season 1 and find it thrilling, still, and even after reading all of the books. I remain a loyal and devoted fan.
From season one Ron has taken every opportunity to emasculated Jamie, it’s as if he can’t get his head around the character as Diana portrays him,he has certainly ruined Sam’s chances of getting any awards for this show and he should recognise this is a story of two people,wh love each other equally. Wake up and heed the fan’s, your actions are going to kill this beautiful story if you don’t get your head out of your backside Ron,listen to the people who count, ie. The Fans
The person who posted this article to Facebook made a comment about emasculating the main male role. I believe the opposite is true. They are making him a cartoon stereotypical male. This story does appeal to feminists because the two are so equal. The book version of the Jamie character is extremely progressive for his time. When he defaults to his 18th century beliefs Claire is there to help him see differently. Let’s not forget she is a 1940’s woman for that matter and rather progressive herself.
Anyway my point is the show missed a MAJOR opportunity to provide both a positive make and female role model in our ever changing and slowly equalizing modern society.
Let’s show real partners not one hero leading one bumbler no matter the gender of either.
One of the best episodes of the season was when Jamie dumped Geneva Dunsany into the mud! I’ve raised two sons and I’ve taught them – as my mother and grandmother taught me – to respect women and men equally, as long as their actions and attitude command it. But men are different than women (no surprise) and in the 1700s a MAN would only take so much from a woman, even one they love. I know Jamie didn’t love Geneva but he was always a gentleman until he’d had enough. Keep him that way!
THANK YOU for saying what Ive been feeling….INTENSELY!!!!! To Ron, Maril, Matt, Toni, Chris Parnell…and all involved in crafting the contect and direction of the show. You do an amazing job of creating an Epic TV series….BUT YOU ARE MISSING THE BOAT , the BIGGEST PART OF THE STORY! about Jamie in the show!!! People posting here are reasonable, dedicated fans and the almost universal message is …. Dont diminish Jamie anymore! Enough of the Ms. Dr. Claire over Jamie! (And hey, I went to the Womens March so….we Im all in favor of strong women) but the show is wrong about this. I also think deleting the extended scene in Faith was an critical omission and decision that diminished the future of their relationship…like Jamie said, ONLY th TWO of them could carry that together..
It WASNT just about Claires loss!…thats WHY he gave up her to save Bree…it cemented their relationships forever. Sams/Jamies dialogue has been secondary and weak last season. Jamie and Claire are EQUALS and the show has totally failed to show that after Claire returns! I agree thats why Sam hasnt won awards…when he has been given the chance like Wentworth, TRAMS and first part of S3 he has shone as the amazing actor he is! As my sister said when she and then the books…Every woman wants a man like Jamie Fraser! PLEASE Hear us! There is SOOOO much great material ahead, but you will only hear an increasing outcry from fans if it doesnt change! I for one, have rewatced the last part of S4 (except for First Wife which I loved) less than I ever have…minus a few favorite parts.
Contined from above…..
We are the ones who gave you ‘Obsessible’ Starz…..
We are your focus group!!! Time to take notice and DO SOMETHING moving forward!!! We Want Outlandter to go on and on! Please….listen to us….
Thanks,
A verra dedicated fan!
Contined from above…..
We are the ones who gave you ‘Obsessible’ Starz…..
We are your focus group!!! Time to take notice and DO SOMETHING moving forward!!! We Want Outlandter to go on and on! Please….listen to us….
Thanks,
A verra dedicated fan!
Totally agree, I hated season three for just that reason. I get they have to change things up for adaption but they could a least keep true to the characters. Bring back the King of men…
I agree, they are doing an injustice to Jamie, Taking away all that makes him, and making Claire stronger than he Jamie really is…Jamie is not being portrayed as DG made him…I loved the episodes of Jamie without Claire…showed his vulnerability and hardship he was going through, Sam played him well!! The writers are writing their own story, NOT DG’s…it is a shame. Also did not like how they wrote Claire as a murderer instead of Willoughby…yes, lets make the woman the character who does that, nothing was wrong with how DG wrote the storyline…Willoughby was protecting Claire, he seemed to like her, it did not downgrade or make fun of a culture…but downgraded women, AGAIN!!! Why… Hope that the writers get a grip on the storyline and write it the way DG wrote it…Season 4/Book 4 has so much in it and not all is well with Jamie and Claire trying to make a home for themselves…I hope the writers start making DG’s characters like she wrote them, not as they want them…and cast the proper actors to portray them…
Also completely agree with the above article and many of the comments. What they have done to Jame’s character has really angered me. This is a great story about two EQUAL and STRONG people. Both actors have been brilliant at playing these characters. It is not only Claire’s story, check writer DGs website. They have so diminished Jamie’s role and undervalued Sam Heughan’s outstanding acting, very noticeable also at interviews! I feel those are also different, constantly promoting CB and TM.
That is not to say that they are not brilliant in their roles but SH is just as good as Jamie, if not better.
Yes adaptions need to be made for TV, like condensing or removing secondary storylines, but changing the main characters? No, that just ends up making the story look weak. If they think(producers) that they are improving the show by diminishing Jamie and making Claire superwoman then they’re wrong. I feel it actually makes Claire look a bit silly. They made such a great show in season 1& most of 2. They should have good hard look at what they are doing now!
Although this article is well written & thought provoking, Despite the obvious impressive knowledge this author has of Outlander books & series, I’m not sure what TV show the author was watching?? I couldn’t disagree more! I think the author is missing the main theme of Season 3: These two strong willed, amazing people have been separated for 20 years!! Of course they are going to have to deal with numerous difficulties & challenges trying to fit into each other’s lives again. Not to mention that they are products of 2 different centuries and all that implies. They both have spent 20 years trying to build a life without the other half of their hearts!
Jamie particularly suffered excruciating loss & pain. He literally had to bring himself back to life and that resurrection didn’t come without great cost! He had to make questionable choices in order to survive after prison. That led him to the situations he was in when Claire found him again, which led her to questioni his decisions. After they reunited, no matter what they had to overcome, they faced it together, equally. I don’t think Jamie was emasculated in any way—quite the contrary! He exuded strength, heroism & resourcefulness in every episode! He not only rescued Claire (and others) physically but emotionally as well!! He plowed through every obstacle with grit & courage. He also showed true vulnerability & fear when faced with the possibility of losing the love of his life yet again. I found that heart stirring & refreshing!
Claire also suffered greatly without Jamie, but hers was more an emotional loss. She had built a wall around her heart to survive. Surely she would absolutely doubt her choice to return when things became difficult! Who wouldn’t? But she literally jumps into a dark ocean to find her man and warn him of impending disaster! As Claire peels off the layers of her clothing to survive the jungle, she is also tearing away the barriers that kept her from complete surrender once more to the love of her life! If occasionally Claire acts like she knows more than Jamie it is because she sometimes does! But that doesn’t make her smarter or more capable— she just occasionally has more knowledge due to being from the future. She is not talking down to Jamie or mothering him, she is advising him as he does to her. He is glad to have her input. But she yields to Jamie when she needs to. They are equals! The love they share is complicated and all-consuming and I think it slowly burns to a roaring fire once again in Voyager!
Thankfully, Sam & Caitriona are the sublime performers who, along with all of the cast & crew of this amazing series, once again created Cinematic Magic in Season 3!! I, for one, can’t wait for Season 4! There is nothing else like Outlander on TV as we know it!?? Bravo to these brilliant artists for bringing Diana Galbadon’s exquisite novels to life for all of us to enjoy and anxiously anticipate! ❤️
Hi Doris – I love your comment and your Outlander PASSION!!! Thank you for being part of the discussion x
Thank you for your kind response! You are very welcome! I love your outstanding blog! I understand your concerns and I hope the producers are paying attention to everything that is written here. I just don’t happen to agree (this time.) But I do believe you have raised some excellent cautions for future production direction. We all want to keep Jamie & Claire the equal and sublimely romantic couple that DG created!!
Here Here Doris! This is the most amazing show and there truly is nothing else like it. I for one, am totally grateful.
Well said Doris, I agree with you on all of this!
Thank you Doris! Well written and beautifully said. I had no idea so many people are so critical…but then again, we are such a passionate group.
Thank you for taking the time to read my comments. We are a passionate bunch, no doubt! But that is what Outlander evokes in us! More proof as to how fabulous this series is, I think. ❤️
Totally agreed!
I couldn’t agree more. What allows us to obsess about Outlander is the way Diana brings all her characters fully to life. I realize there are time constraints in the adaptation but sacrificing the soul of the characters, any of them, makes me want to turn off the TV and go back to my books
(I’m referring to the deleted scene where Jamie is upset over Faith’s death.)
I have never seen that deleted scene. But Sam/Jamie has had some tremendous scenes and I don’t understand why he has been overlooked, e.g., S1the entire rape scene was so powerful a part for Sam to play. He had to give more of himself as an actor than Tobias. S3, Sam was phenomenal in the argument scene, right after Laoghaire & her daughters appeared. He deserves much more credit than he receives. The writers need to heed the book more, and realize that these people live in the 18thc, NOT the 20th! That being said, the man is head-of-household, & we know that Jamie is more than capable. Claire takes a backseat to him, at least in public. I love that he makes the decisions or they make them together. Jamie usually knows best! I get that Claire is a strong woman-how many of us could put aside all our niceties to rough-it in the 1700s?! BUT, if I hear one more woman extol how strong a woman Claire is, I will scream!!!! The fans, younger women, whomever, need to get “it,” WE (women) are strong, we should not need to be told! Claire is unusual for the 1700s because she’s gone back in time, and she had been through a war. She’s also very stubborn. Now, 20 yrs. later, she’s matured, she’s become a Dr., she knows much more than the other people living in the 1700s. BUT, her driving force in life is still Jamie! And, her medicine. As such, they are a modern couple, and this is how they should be portrayed. For me, Jamie/Sam is the whole show. If his character is emasculated, or Sam leaves, I also leave, watching the show. Thank you for starting this dialogue!
I agree…we women are strong and do not need to be told daily…Claire is strong but because she is from the 20th century and had done so much, nurse during Wartime, becoming a doctor later, etc, but to take away from Jamie/Sam is just wrong…DG made them both strong due to their love for each other, they will do anything to save each other…and when the writers take away the strength of one to enhance the other I just do not agree…they have been drifting further and further away from DG’s storyline and I do not agree with that…I was so bored with the episode “The Duldrums”…could not be further from the book and Jared’s crew in book were a nice crew, not the nasty garbage that was written…WTH is going on??? Also on the Island Claire encountered NO snake, or ants… the writers could have written the ship scene’s more by book, by using that episode in a more book form way…and they could have done their encounter with the Pirates…
I agree with most everything here, but would like to add another piece to Jamie that I think sums it up. They have turned Jamie into Sam eye candy. The worst part of the whole season was in the reunion – the brothel scene – where they had Sam move naked to the table and had him lit by the candle. I thought that was a total insult to Sam and his acting ability. I believe these types of scenes are one of the major reasons Sam has been passed over for awards. Nobody takes him seriously when they do this. Sam had an incredible first half of the season, but did anyone else notice that this was when he wasn’t playing against Cait.
I have also listened to many of the producer’s podcasts. During S1 and S2 they were giving over the top raves to the acting of Cait and Tobias and rarely mentioned Sam except to say he “did a nice job” on that scene. He got kudos for 301 but that’s about it.
Starz, Chris Parnell, Ron, Maril, Matt, Toni….and everyone making this top notch Outlander show….
PLEASE read these respectful comments from hundreds of dedicated loving fans!!!!
You MUST TWEEK the show if you want it to continue to keep us and go forward……theres sooo much great stuff with mega potential that lies ahead!!! We want more seasons…..!
I hope Sams brave question to Ron at the Emmy Panel about could he have meater scenes? and Rons answer, hopefully a poor condescending inappropriate answer of NO! Was a JOKE (Ron , millions saw that….can you read here…) was not an indication of problems that are affecting the show….
I PRAY you’ve changed direction for Season Four before its too late….there still eps scripts hanging out there that MUST be tweeked…..
PLease…. though that goofy Jamie Claire (oh better say Claire-Jamie!) clip about the American Dream sure wasnt any indication.
Starz— you gotta make us LONG for next Season! Not firld posts like these….!!!!
Remember…we love and appreciate your talented hard work!! Youve missed the boat on your fan base!
(Oh, I went to the Womens March….it has NOTHING to do with today’s ‘issues’…..it’s my love of Outlander! It is my dream and escape!)
Very lovingly and respectfully….but DESPERATE SAD fan,
K
Also, having worked in market research for a major magazine…..ahem….the customer IS alwsys right…..
All of the postings articulated so well my feelings, so thank you! I hope that the powers that be read, take to heart and appreciate the sincere critiques that are being offered, all with the intent of helping this show be all that it can and should be!
Yes, Yes ! So glad someone else agrees. As a single father to three young men- who are respectful to all- I am upset that Jamie is treated like an emotional wreak-tossed in the ship’s jail because he got mad while Claire Saves the World and wins Survivor 1784. Why do we need to see holes drilled in heads but the fact that he was blackmailed into sex and sacrifices his chance at freedom so he can look after his son-that gets fluffed over. Leaving out Jamie’s heartbreak over the lose of his first child-simply shows that in our culture, the man is no more then a “donation” with no attachment to the child until it arrives. I use to enjoy watching this show with a fine woman I am friends; who also has 3 sons but lately we both cringe at the weak role Sam is asked to play. He is suppose to speak many languages and be well read but all he does is follow Claire around and act like a foil; not an equal.
James – thank you for your comment! It’s wonderful to hear a man’s perspective!! Especially on 207 – I couldn’t agree more. Jamie’s experience as the man, husband, father MATTERS. Healthy men are so important – just like healthy women. ❤️
Starz, Chris Parnell, Ron, Maril, Matt, Toni….and everyone making this top notch Outlander show….
PLEASE read these respectful comments from hundreds of dedicated loving fans!!!!
You MUST TWEEK the show if you want it to continue to keep us and go forward……theres sooo much great stuff with mega potential that lies ahead!!! We want more seasons…..!
I hope Sams brave question to Ron at the Emmy Panel about could he have meater scenes? and Rons answer, hopefully a poor condescending inappropriate answer of NO! Was a JOKE (Ron , millions saw that….can you read here…) was not an indication of problems that are affecting the show….
I PRAY you’ve changed direction for Season Four before its too late….there still eps scripts hanging out there that MUST be tweeked…..
PLease…. though that goofy Jamie Claire (oh better say Claire-Jamie!) clip about the American Dream sure wasnt any indication.
Starz— you gotta make us LONG for next Season! Not firld posts like these….!!!!
Remember…we love and appreciate your talented hard work!! Youve missed the boat on your fan base!
(Oh, I went to the Womens March….it has NOTHING to do with today’s ‘issues’’ for me! Been there, done that. Enough already! It’s my love of the Jamie-Claire story in Outlsnder that fans are PLEADING for here… Outlander is my dream and escape!)
Very lovingly and respectfully….but DESPERATE SAD fan,
K
Also, having worked in market research for a major magazine back in the day…..ahem….the customer IS always right…..
Holy cow! I am blown away by the thoughtful, respectful discourse here. It’s fantastic!!!
I am totally cool with people disagreeing with my perspective and each other, but I do ask that you do it in a respectful way. I am a huge fan of the show and everyone who works on it, always. You are welcome and encouraged to leave your thoughtful comments here, but I will remove those that seem blatantly disrespectful.
We are ALL passionate about Outlander, which is great. Let’s keep it classy guys x
Agree that pushing it toward Claire is weakening the story. I still like it but not feeling the love like in S1 & even most of S2. Would suggest they pay more attention to the author of the books, maybe listening to her comments more. I want there to be more seasons but I want them to be consistent with the characters and overall story arc. I get they can’t do everything or follow the book exactly, & that’s ok. But screw around with the basic character traits,& you’ll lose me.
Your constructive observations are warranted and needed. There has been a bit of controversy brewing on many of the Outlander individual fan sites for some time now. You may or may not be surprised by the number of fans who echo your sentiments. Many are expressing displeasure with the “feminist” angle and the promotion of Caitriona Balfe as the anchor of the series. Caitriona is fantastic, but she alone is not Outlander. What an insult to Sam and the many other castmates who make Outlander so amazing. Many have expressed extreme displeasure with the second half of season 3 episodes and are also disenfranchised with the deminished portrayal of Sam Heughan’s character. Much discussion has centered around a call for a shift from women’s empowerment back to simply telling a love story through both lead characters equally. I do not advocate for others to boycott the show or its cast, but I personally have stopped watching and returned to the books, which I enjoy much more. I am a woman, but do not watch Outlander to feel empowered. I watch for the entertainment value and actually for Sam Heughan…his acting style is mesmerizing, animated and emotional. I would like to remain optimistic about S4 but have heard or seen nothing to make me think things will change-for now I will pass on the political overtones which are quite pervasive throughout the series. Thank you for keeping this topic relevant and for motivating and encouraging others to share his/her opinions openly. I hope we all continue to ban together to advocate for positive, thoughtful change.
Diana and Toni Graphia appeared at a promotional for the season 3 release on dvd. If Diana did’t like or agree with the film adaptations of her books, I’m sure she wouldn’t promote the tv series. I enjoy both the books and tv series. I don’t agree that feminism is overriding the series. I like the adaptations very much.
Thank you Adrienne!
I never get too tired to say… Outlander needs Ira Behr back to the serie. I miss his skillful work. Ira and Ron… PLEEEEASE!
I fully agree with you. Jamie should be the quiet hero example for young people to imprint on. Surprisingly Ron should know this since much was made of the parallels in Ron and Terry’s marriage with Outlander characters. It was a great hope that Ron, more than others, would understand the dynamics. I dislike many of the current writers, too superficial, compared to the first season. They fall back on formula dialog when Diana’s is much better. I too hope that Sam and Cat can stiffen their spines and get closer to the original. It would be dreadful if Outlander failed when we all know that it can be done.
When I saw the trailer and then heard some of Caitriona’s comments about S4 I had the same fears. She said Claire feels at home in America because she lived there for 20 years, she’s in her element. No, 20th Century Boston and 18th Century North Carolina are worlds apart, so please don’t portray Claire as the all powerful know-it-all. Then when I heard Ron say they did the bear scene but it was different from the book, my first thought was what do you want to bet Claire kills the bear? I actually think it would be ground breaking TV to have male and female leads who are equals. We’ve seen badass women. We rarely see a balanced couple.
Uggg… thank you Courtney, but unfortunately I feel this comes way too late for them to correct their course now for season 4, as I’m sure it’s mostly written and half shot by now. And… I can totally see them using Claire’s last 20 years of living in America as a means for them diminishing more of Jamie’s book qualities. I had such high hopes for season 3, as Voyager is my favorite novel of the series, but found myself completely disappointed and frustrated once Creme De Menthe aired…I, in fact, threw the remote control at the TV during that episode… and it was “living room softball practice” for the remainder of season 3. I honestly do not understand why two, self-proclaimed, book fans put in such a position of control of this series could make such egriegous mistakes. I guess books are truly interpreted by the reader, and every reader is different.
Wow, you’ve certainly hit a nerve with many of us viewers. I love the books and I love the show. I’m so happy, as I know you are, that our beloved books are being made into a stellar TV adaption. In many ways, it’s much more than I could’ve ever hoped for, if you would ask me about a possible Outlandr adaption five years ago. I’ve definitely noticed that the focus of the TV show has been on Claire’s strength, intellect, and perseverance. It’s a trope that Hollywood has seen as forward thinking, in the past. I believe, as you so eloquently stated above, that the writers are enamoured with the strong female story line, perhaps thinking that’s the interesting, novel (no pun intended) approach that their audience crave. And for nonbooj readers, that may be a new take on female roles in the past, whether in the 1940s, 50s, 60s or in the 1700s.
Where I think they may have missed the boat ( again, no puns intended) is when they passed up the opportunity to portray a strong, smart, caring woman and an equally strong, intellectual, thoughtful man in a mature, enamored coupke facing their eventful, tragedy-filled life as fully functioning partners. The compromises (for lack of a better word) Claire makes in the book to accommodate Jamie’s pride and to respect his ideas and scruples, in the books, showed how much Claire views Jamie as the ultimate leader ( though he is often a servant leader) and her true partner in life are sometimes missing from the TV show. I love both Sam and Cait. I noticed that Sam was amazing in the first five eps of season 3, as was Caitriona. I’m not sure why, but something was missing from their chemistry in many scenes after the reunion. I loved a few of their scenes, like in Doldrums, under decks, but the turtle soup scene was awkward, and not in a good way. Jamie lost his shine in the later episodes, though one would think his shine would, as Sam stated, have been gone in the beginning.
I am very hopeful for season four because I am ever the optimist and I just love the show. I am reading book for right now, and preparation for season 4. I hope that the writers and producers make the brave decision to show two equally strong, intelligent, loving characters who face life’s challenges, for better or worse, together. Either way, I’ll keep watching and loving the TV adaption.
Thanks for your own brave, intelligent, caring commentary above. I always look forward to your take on things.
Dori – thanks for this – as I’m reading through these comments I’m shocked at some of them. Nice to come across yours – phew
As I re-read the comments that have been posted, I think the concerns boil down to wanting Jamie to be portrayed in a nuanced way building on the strengths gained from his life experiences so far and replicating the balance that exists Claire and Jamie’s relationship in the books. I am an optimist also, and think the writers and directors will do that. Hoping that we are maybe reading too much into the preview clip. There were a few scenes I didn’t like in Season 3, but overall loved it.
Diana is still very involved as a consultant to the show and is always giving feedback as they go. She doesn’t win every battle, but she knows her fans and the producers are smart cookies. I think they’ll listen (fingers crossed).
How can we write the Powers that Be and express our frustrations with the dumbing down of Jamie?
Wow, tuned into a Caitriona/Claire hate fest here. And let’s not pretend that it isn’t. But I’m not surprised to see this, as the author Herself makes every effort to diminish Claire and Caitriona. You all say you want a show that treats them equally, but then proceed to talk about how you essentially want a show that is entirely Sam/Jamie. That’s not equality.
These comments are so incredibly discouraging as a woman. It’s not about me too and times up. It’s about representation. And I, for one, am THRILLED to finally have a female-driven show with a phenomenal actress playing her. To have women complain that a show is too feminist absolutely baffles me. Is everyone going to complain about Sam’s new movie, where he’s essentially an accessory to two female leads? God forbid a man should not be the star.
If I was Caitriona Balfe, I’d be reading these comments and calling my attorney to get out of my contract. “I love her, but Sam’s the whole show and if he leaves, I do.” “She’s great but it’s Sam that deserves the screen time and the awards.”
How much clearer can these comments make it that she’s not wanted by the fans of her own show? What a crying shame that she and her character are taken so for granted.
Laura i agree whole heartedly….it is so discouraging to me reading some of these comments actually made me cry.
Some of the comments here, criticizing either Cait’s or Sam’s acting ability are way out of line…..childish, ugly, small. My God people, get a grip and grow up! These are human beings you’re cutting down….two people working hard at their craft. Please think before you post.
I didn’t intend to post a response but after reading the article and all the responses I’m appauled and quite angry. If this post was intended as a critique of the show it did nothing more than stir the hornets’ nest of Sam worshippers who simply hate Caitriona. Why is she blamed for shortcomings you perceive in the TV adaptation? Why do you hate her for being recognized as a super talented actress doing an outstanding job in her role that critics have positively responded to? When nominations are announced is she competing in the same category as Sam? No, she isn’t! Is she taking anything away from him and prevents him from being nominated? No, she’s done nothing but work her butt off for a show with a fandom that doesn’t give a hoot about her, the character she plays and the recognition she brought and continues to bring to the show. If Sam hasn’t received any nominations maybe he should look at his own delivery. Most of you say that he was outstanding in the first 4 episodes yet no critics found him compelling enough to nominate him other than a few who write about him expecting fan clicks on their sites. Yelling that he’s undermined by writers, executives and especially Caitriona makes your arguments null and void. There’s no conspiracy against him. Sam knows Outlander saved his acting career which was going nowhere at the time and won’t leave just because some of you think he’s indispensable and should demand changes in the way his character is written. He may count on more fans but if Cait leaves there’s no show either. Caitriona has been 100% essential to the show, has done an incredible job in her role and has always been generous and kind to fans in spite of the constant nastiness she’s been getting every time she’s playing her character or recognized by critics. As such, she should be appreciated for her own talent and achievements not hated like this because you want to elevate Sam. If you want a show with him alone, campaign for a show that will give you that. In the meantime Outlander is gaining viewers so obviously everyone associated with it is doing something right and most viewers enjoy the show as it is presented.
It’s become a Cait AND Sam hatefest depending on who’s post you read. It’s out of control and so disrespectful to both of them.
I would have never thought it would come to this, a couple of years ago – Caitriona vs Sam, Sam vs Caitriona. Some of extreme Sam’s fans are unfairly putting down Cait because they feel SH is being sidelined, which results in Cait’s fans coming out and belittling Sam because they feel angry. Just sad all around and there is no end to it, because both sides only see their idol being wronged and nothing more.
Rarely if ever one finds fans of Caitriona disparaging or complaing about Sam. Yet, his fans always bitch and disparage her as if she’s to blame for any concerns they have about the show. That’s where the unfairness lies. It’s one thing to lay out things you want changed in the writing or production room and quite another to go after the co-star and female lead of the show who has nothing to do with those complains. Demanding changes for Sam and his character by disparaging Caitriona lessens the credibility of anyone pretending to want Outlander improved as a show. Stay on topic and away from blaming the actors.
“Rarely if ever”, says the one who did exactly that two posts before.
“yet no critics found him compelling enough to nominate him other than a few who write about him expecting fan clicks on their sites”
Your argument would work better if you avoided bashing Sam, doing the exact thing you accuse the others of doing.
Mag, that was in response to all the posts about Caitriona getting accolades and nominations. If nothing came his way it is not her fault now is it? While most of you praise his work as outstanding maybe you should also look at the possibility that he is not perfect. If you don’t like comparissons don’t make it, don’t blame and put it on Caitriona and don’t take it on anyone defending her when the onslaught comes from Sam’s fans. Caitriona has never impeded Sam’s success, so if you want fair be fair and don’t blame her everytime Outlander is not to your liking.
And I wrote what I wrote in response to an hypocritical post by you and anyone that say things like “don’t do X” at the same time as doing X, just about someone else.
If you bash Sam to defend Caitriona you are not better than the ones who do the opposite.
Hey MaG and Dismaid, I am gonna ask you guys to take this argument elsewhere now… thanks guys
A thousand Amens to this.
This is a late reply but i feel your comment is the one being personal about one of the actors. People might have preferences about who’s acting they prefer but I think both actors are mostly being appreciated by fans for their great acting and hard work. The show wouldn’t work without either of them! Many many people here and on other SM sites are commenting on the changes made to the Jamie role, thereby undermining the story. Your comments about SH acting career were the nasty comments! Cait didn’t have any acting career before Outlander. not really the issue here. And people are also drawing their own conclusions when viewing interviews and promotion panels. That’s not to say that those conclusions are right, but imo the interviews have definitely changed in comparison with how they were a few years ago. Most want both characters to be portrayed in a equally strong way and both actors to be treated equally and with fairness.
Have to disagree with Caitriona being essential to the show. Really? Then why is the fanbase female? Sam as Jamie is the draw period. Not because of being eye candy, but because of the way he has played Jamie. Watching Sam in an interview shows how different he is from Jamie making it so clear that he is a superb actor. I don’t know why Ron, Matt, and the other writers have interfered with his character. It’s such an important part of the story. I like Cait, but Sam is being treated unfairly. One more thing, Ron et. al. The customer is always right. If the customer is unhappy with the product, sales will diminish.
Thank you Dismaid…I agree! It’s really exhausting! How can you not watch this show and see how wonderful it is because of these two characters!
I couldn’t agree more I don’t know.how.many times I have been watching the show wondering what the hell just happened and where has our beloved Jamie gone and where have the writers hidden our smart passionate loyal soldier JAMMF and how many more of Sam’s scenes do we have to see picked up off the edit floor to be added to a BTS extra DVD set I love Claire I love her intelligence her snarkiness and grit bit I don’t like how the writers are making it a Claire Randall story and NOT the Jamie & Claire story These two have a love like no other and their belief and trust in eachother and thier passion for their beliefs their family and friends and ESPECIALLY each other I miss this Please TPTB and writers for the LOVE of God quit messing with a beautiful story
I have never been as involved with a show as this one. I’m 67 so that’s saying something. But I also have never seen a production team as involved with their fans as this one. The deleted scenes don’t have to be shared by Ron. He chooses to do that. The feedback given by team is more than most teams do. So I feel they are being castigated because they have shared as much as they have. Yes the show may not always be what I want but it mostly is, and, besides, it’s not my show. The books are so phenomenal it’s a amazing that anyone even dared to take them on. None of the fans commenting here are going to stop watching the show so stop saying it. Any fan that puts that much emotion and heart into their very heartfelt opinions will not give up on this show. I just think that the creative choices are the team’s to make. So many of the episodes are so outstanding that it’s difficult to keep that up for every single episode. I just think everyone should chill a bit, enjoy the shows or don’t, reread the books if that’s what makes you feel better and let the show be the show. I’m always anxious to see which way they will go with the story as written because it’s got to be unbelievably hard to turn 100 pages into an hour long show. Complain if you must but please be civil and imagine a group of people critiquing every move and choice you make at your job. As a teacher I could make 35 sets of parents happy, but the one set that were disrespectfully critical would suck the air out of the room and increase my workload immeasurably and add to my fatigue. . And this production team doesn’t need to do its “parent conferences”, it chooses to do them. So consider yourself lucky for the opportunity to interact with them all, stop trying to figure out what, if any, problems are going on behind the scenes.. they are their problems to solve… and enjoy the show as presented, or don’t. Just, please stop saying things that will make them shrug and say, why bother, we’re done. You’re sucking the air out of the room and you wonder why they seemed less than upbeat at their Emmy roundtable? They’re exhausted. Respect. That’s all. I’ve said my peace.
I agree with you completely! Many are coming across as whiney crybabies and this production doesn’t deserve the wrath of book fans. I loved the books too but this is a different medium and the team is doing an excellent job with this show.
Oh Kathleen, I couldn’t agree more!!! Being a 67 year old former teacher (well almost!) I understand exactly what you are saying. The whole team is amazing, the actors breath taking and the books just life changing. I made a comment earlier but I think your comments are ‘spot on’ . I have been dismayed over the last day or so to see the discussion descend into unpleasant , peevish jibes at something we should , as fans, rejoice in. Just remember – what lucky folk we are to have the show AND the books!
AMEN. The intention of this article was to gently bring to light something, not bash the writers and the actors. I have complete respect for the whole team. Respectful discussion is welcome, other comments are being removed.
Right on, sister!
I think this article from The Hollywood Reporter is a good example of what is being said.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/outlander-heaven-earth-explained-toni-graphia-interview-1059665
—
About Jamie:
Meanwhile, back on the Artemis, Jamie attempted to go after Claire but ended up being thrown in the brig. He tried to bribe Fergus (Cesar Domboy) and convince other sailors to commit mutiny by offering his blessing for Fergus and Marsali’s (Lauren Lyle) proposed marriage. By the end of the episode, Fergus and Marsali convinced the captain to let Jamie out of his cell to lend a hand on deck, and he gave them his blessing anyway, seeing how Fergus proved his love and devotion for Marsali.
“We knew Jamie must be going nuts trying to get to her, and the challenge for us in the writers room was we wanted to see what Jamie was doing, and honestly, what can he do?” exec producer Tony Graphia tells The Hollywood Reporter. “He’s a hero, so he’d do something right? He would climb up over the railing with a knife in his teeth and rescue her. But we realized he really couldn’t do that. He’s outnumbered on this ship, it’s someone else’s ship with another captain. And that ship would never catch up to this military ship. How do you make a story out of that?”
That’s how they decided to get Jamie thrown into a cell for the majority of the episode. “We came up with this story where Jamie flips out and tries to do all these things and gets himself thrown in the brig,” Graphia says. “Our hero that we imagine would have jumped off the boat and swam after Claire is now locked up. For him, we made drama out of inaction instead of action.”
—
About Claire:
By the end of the episode, Jamie is out of his cell on the Artemis and Claire has successfully escaped the Porpoise. But their journey back to each other will not be an easy one. Thankfully Claire is the kind of woman who doesn’t back down from a challenge, as was showcased in her work on board the Porpoise saving the lives of the men who kidnapped her.
“I loved how even though Claire thinks she may have lost Jamie, she doesn’t slow down and she keeps kicking ass and saving a whole ship full of guys, hundreds of guys,” Graphia says. “She doesn’t just fall apart because she misses her man. That’s why we love Claire, and that’s what makes her a true heroine.”
As for ending the hour on that cliffhanger with Claire alone in the middle of the ocean, Graphia laughs.
“Claire jumping off the ship into the dark, that was everyone’s favorite part of the book. We knew we had to do that,” she says. “We had to show that. It’s such a rock star move. It’s a superhero move. We loved leaving the episode with Claire in the middle of a dark ocean, floating, with nothing. Where she ends up and what she has to go through, the next episode will entail some favorite book moments plus a new story, just like this episode. She may regret that jump.”
—-
Jamie had his heroic moment changed into a storyline that made him seem stupid, meanwhile for Claire, Jamie isn’t that important.
Excellent example of the writers missing the point. Jamie would have been too smart to try and take over the ship AND he would not have used Fergus that way. The way they wrote the episode Jamie becomes once again a reactionary, childish character.
THANK YOU AND THANK YOU.
I have said this more times than I can count, always respectfully – but insistent that…while the First season was fabulous and absolutely true to the books, since then Ron Moore took hold of the idea that this is “Claire’s story”, and ran with it…from calling Sam/Jamie one of the ‘big three’ in an interview, to talking about their love story being “one” of the central themes of the show…to the repeated cutting “for time” of every significant scene of Sam’s that might have garnered him some industry attention but that more importantly would have made Jamie more than “that guy who rescues Claire,” and finally to the complete destruction of Jamie’s character the last half of S3 in favor of watching Claire wander the jungle.
In no way shape or form do I direct these comments, nor think should any comments, be directed at Cait…she is tremendous, her work is tremendous and I appreciate her and congratulate her on her recognition.
Regardless, I remain distressed at the lack of Sam’s success in industry recognition, and feel that it is due to this very thing, the diminishing, at almost every turn, of Jamie’s character in favor of building up Claires. It began most strongly in S2 – when the whole plan with the prince was made to look like it was Claire’s idea down to the killing of Dougal by the both of them…Jamie is an intelligent, educated, crafty, and strong man. Why can’t we celebrate instead that Claire is a strong woman and because of that doesn’t ‘need’ a weak man to be strong. While Cait’s performance is always tremendous, the fact that one of the writers stated (and I can’t remember which) that the episodes of Cait caring for the men on the ship, and of her ‘wandering’ in the jungle – were crafted so that she would get nominations, seems grossly unfair – and a poor way to approach story telling.
I could go on and on because I feel so strongly about this subject.
I appreciate your efforts here but fear they will be in vain. I have given up all hope, and will gradually give up all interest, of this changing and in this thing that has become not the story of a marriage of two equals, but of this superwoman who knows and does all. Thank you.
i’m fairly sure that I’ve read and listened to almost all interviews and never heard anyone say the writers created scenes like the ones you mentioned to facilitate nominations for Caitriona. So, unless you have those exact quotes your implications are uncalled for.
That was a lot BS , that let out why these women are so angry. Sam doesn’t get awards because it’s a conspiracy against him ! This is idiotic and sounds like the desperate housewife of wherever … Maybe Sam doesn’t get awards because he’s not good enough? I really hope Cait leaves the show and lets the fandom admire Sam’s biceps for 13 episodes straight.
I am not advocating giving up the show by any stretch – and I do not believe the writers are ruining it. I did want to give them a chance to read some constructive feedback.
I think Sam will win awards in time. In all honesty I think Caitriona’s acting has just gotten stronger and stronger since Season 1, and Sam has moments of brilliance, but can be inconsistent at times. He is very talented, they both are. Ron’s writing is some of the best on the show. I support all of them, I’d just like to see Jamie’s character made a little more consistent with Book Jamie, that’s it 🙂
I disagree, it’s the writing that’s inconsistent not Sam. I think some of the dialogue would be cheesy in the hands of another actor. Not to mention, the choppy editing is almost always detrimental to his performance,
Well for my 2 cents…be careful about criticism of Sam .This fandom is one of the most vitriolic I have ever seen. You will have proverbial shit storm on ur hands. Some of them are very invested. You can’t believe these are adults
As far as the story after season 2 and part of 3 they were well done well after that it went off the rails. If it looks like that next season I am not sure it will hold my attention. I have not read the books and I know the difference between the 2 mediums. It has little to do with sexism and more to do with poor storylines.
People are welcome to express their opinions, as long as it’s done respectfully
I believe I have now read all of your messages- I’ve removed some, replied to some, and enjoyed most. Thank you so much for the wonderful conversation – including multiple opinions and perspectives xo
I just wanted to say that most here have made the same comments about not liking what has been done with Jamie’s role, as it ruins the connection between two strong characters who make this story so compelling. Both actors are brilliant in portraying the TWO main characters. And nobody is trying to criticise Cat. But it seems many feel for Sam as his role is being weakened and his acting is being very undervalued. Nothing to do with Sam worship. I feel his acting has been outstanding in showing Jamie through all the different stages of his life. But if you look at the panel or recent interviews it is clear that something is not right. We can all see that Cat and her role as Claire is being pushed forward, making recent interviews uncomfortable in my opinion. Their interviews together are also not the same. He was okay in the LA times interview, but I have been puzzled about the change in 2017 interviews! So different to SH at 2016 JIbland in Italy. He was confident, in command of the audience with great interaction.( on youtube). He is a RS conservatoire graduate.
They did a great production of season 1. Why would you change that?
There have also been so many other comments like these, elsewhere on SM. It really is time for the production team to take notice.
Just my opinion but I find it very disheartening that you removed comments. If you wanted a true representation of how the fandom was feeling you should have left them all in, warts and all. I find it rather disheartening but not surprising that you removed most of the ones that were critical of this blog and of Sam but yet kept the ones that are critical of Caitriona and all of the comments that agree with you. If the intent of this blog was to be seen by Ron etc. And show them a true representation of what the fandom is feeling, then you have in my opinion you negated that by removing comments. If you only wanted comments that agree with you then perhaps you should only send it to the ones you know who agree with you.
Anyways just my thoughts which will probably get removed.
Hi KC – I removed comments that I felt were insulting to the cast, crew, or another commenter. I’ve left plenty that don’t agree with my opinion, and also ones that don’t like Sam’s acting. I have no problem with differences of opinion respectfully stated. I do have a problem with what I consider blatant disrespect for others, so yeah, those are gone.
I was new to the entire Outlander phenomena both tv adaptation and books at the beginning of season 3, so my experience is fresh and concentrated. I started reading the books from the first on approach to episode 304. Finished Fiery Cross by Christmas. Your piece expresses very well my own observations. I was struck by the diminution of Jamie starting with A. Malcolm. In the books, it is the relationship and interdépendance between Jamie and Claire that is the lead role. I think that the script writers are unfamiliar with traditional committed marriage or don’t understand how important it is for both husband and wife to be strong for each other for a marriage to last. I actually think their perspective on marriage must be jaded by modern cultural norms. The focus of the storyline has been skewed to Claire’s and will need to refocus on the relationship (NOT ONLY physical intimacy) if I am to remain loyal to the show. As of the season 4 teaser, I don’t hold much hope for seasons 5 or beyond.
I have yet to read the books so I am a bit blindsided by the frustration everyone is feeling. I was introduced to the series before the books so I decided to watch the series first. If I haven’t read a book ahead of a movie or series, I tend to wait until the series is over before starting the books to avoid getting too attached and frustrated with the screen adaptation. Let’s face it, there is always disappointment. The connection made to characters and storylines in books is unparalleled.
The first season is brilliant and raw and filled with passion. Everyone in the cast is perfect beyond belief. I viewed Claire’s knowledge of the future as reason for her to take the lead at times. When creative minds collaborate for screen, I imagine there are many different angles you can take with the story and many different creative liberties. It’s disappointing that some choices had been made in an attempt to get nominations. Unfortunately, I’m sure that’s very common in the industry. It may be a way of locking in viewership and money to keep the show going? From what I understand, Diana is very involved so I have faith in the writers, directors and crew to keep the story on point. They’ve put together a masterpiece so far. Let’s hope they don’t stray from the amazing elements that set this series apart from all others.
I concur with Mathildea, While i have not read the books, I do wonder why the writers and producers do not pay attention to the educated fans who respond to these blogs begging for Sam to not just be a hot head reactionary ? Thank heavens Sam fought to not fall apart seeing Bree’s photos. The man was tortured to the brink of insanity, saved his family by going to prison and was blackmailed- the love for his child was a positive feeling not worth a total collapse. As a male and single father; believe me I have shed tears. However when people find out I am single they all assume I am divorced; rather then a widower. Marriage now a days seems to be almost disposable. That is why I became attached in Season 1 to a couple who would do ANYTHING to help their spouse. Real love to me is not shown on TV, where everyone is hopping in and out of beds. My sons roll their eyes when I speak about waiting for the one special woman. Real love is when you walk the floor of a cancer ward and you will see spouses who sleep by the bedside praying not for one more day, but rather no more pain, just holding a hand,
Well said James! Beautiful depiction of what Love REALLY is! It’s not all the pleasant times and things only, but rather what happens in the hard and sad times! Making the choice, sacrifice and commitment to fight through it together at all costs!
So beautiful James. Love hearing a man’s perspective too, in addition to all these incredible women. Your boys are so lucky to have you!!
Thank you James for sharing your observations with us. They are most moving. I agree wholeheartedly .
Bless you.
I’m glad I’m not alone in feeling a little let down by the show as the seasons played on. I devoured the books and got COMPLETELY SUCKED IN! When I started watching the show I had that same giddy, totally involved and so in love feeling! Alas with seasons 2 & 3 I lost that Lovin Feeling! ? As I watched these seasons I felt the connection between Jamie and Claire wasn’t there! It was ALWAYS there in the books! Still holding on to hope that the show can find that magic again!!!!
I agree that most of S4 has most likely been filmed but the editing can be adjusted. I think that the book vrs show issues are not the main point. Not everyone can express themselves well ( just read a few college seniors research papers) so the complaints about how it is not in the book -what fans are saying is the lack of equality in Jamie’s leadership and intelligence is missing; so they assume it is because the show is not identical to the book.
As for awards- even in this blog if someone mentions Sam’s lack of significant nominations; then the next reply claims the writer is being mean or disrespectful. The reality is Starz can only nominate a limited number of actors and they seem to be pushing the male lead in Power. If someone says they would prefer Claire not be the one to make all the decisions and Jamie just an immature hot head-the next reply is “why do you hate Claire or Cait”.
Disagreement, with polite lexicon and logical reasons listed; is not hate.
Time to throw in the towel. Starz released a new promo this morning- it is billing itself as the “strong woman” network. The photos and videos only show Claire-with captions such as “a woman ahead of her time” -and all the other promos are only about woman. My guess is the Outlander producers must know this; so as long as Sam is happy being employed, I do not anticipate that his role on OL will be changed much. My OL viewing partner keeps insisting I put down my journals and just read the books. Let us know if any of you find one TV show with married couples these day as positive as role models.
If this is true and they are continuing with the super Claire story! Then yes that is not only sad, I also doubt if there will be many more seasons to come. They are doing themselves no favours doing this or doing CB any favours.
S1 and most of S2 were such great productions of a wonderful strong and equal relationship brought to life so brilliantly by both CB and SH. And a fantastic supporting cast.
It seems to me that the production team have mistaken many fans interest as being only focused on Jamie/SH looks and physical attractiveness.
They apparently seem to grossly underestimate that it is Jamie’s character that is so enormously desirable. A man, not without flaws or mistakes, but able to be strong or gentle when needed. And capable of great love with a equally strong woman. Also pioneer couples had to strong together when starting in a new country. The story will just end looking a bit silly.
James, Can you give us a link to the promo? I can’t find anything new today!
I saw the promo on FB. Seems that the narrative going forward will be about strong women at the expense of alpha men like Jamie. Think I will have to go back to re reading the books and not get my expectations up for S4. Really sad how things are being bent to conform with rhe political correctness of the Me2 movement at the expense of the books.
Well James, that is a truly sad bit of news. Your OL partner is right if we want the story we love we’ll have to go back to reading the books. The power of money and media once again overrules the desires of the watching public. All we can do is vote with our remotes and say good bye to Starz!
It’s too bad Starz doesn’t get the importance of a Win/Win model and instead wants to support the Win/Lose model of relationships-so backward!
This is no reflection on my admiration for Sam Heughan or Caitronia Balfe. They are actors playing the roles they’ve been given.
I am so interested to read these comments. I think there are a lot of politics behind this show. The first big twist was the scene where Claire invites Frank to give her oral sex. In the book, it was Jamie who reached that level of intimacy with her first and her heart was totally committed to Jamie for the manly man he was. I think that the “People Who Drive The Show,” henceforth called by me the WHOS, wanted to give the better known actor Tobias Menzies more screen time and more action than I cared to see, thinking it would give the show more legitimacy. Politics. The next big problem was skipping the reunion in the underground spring at the end of Season 1. The powerful love relationship and strength of Jamie were diminished in Season 2 and we had to keep seeing the disgusting face of Jack Randall in his bed, which didn’t happen. I have never seen more beautiful sets or costumes anywhere. But I made the mistake of following some of the WHOS and some of the actors on Twitter and learned that a very talented costume designer was very much in favor of the Woman’s March in DC, etc., to the point of vitriol, and this type of political thinking in Hollywood is what Ms. Balfe endorses while perhaps hopefully advancing her career with actors George Clooney and others living in that world. It is the feminist movement in overdrive, and manly men are being minimized unless they’re super heroes in cartoon films. Ms. Balfe then began to distance herself from her co-star. In season one Sam Heughan was at least as good an actor as she. I thought he was incredibly accomplished and he still is. Did their relationship sour? The acting between them was not as passionate, and why did Claire have to help Jamie drive in the blade that killed Dougal (spelling)? Our Jamie didn’t need any help. By Season 3, it was so clear that the WHOS were highlighting the Claire character’s strength and savvy over Jamie’s that I haven’t rewatched it 6000 times as I did Season 1. In an interview, did Ms. Balfe mention she had had to have “raunchy sex” in Outlander? And did she make a New Year’s joke which implied that her co-star is gay? In the books their lovemaking was never raunchy, but really hot, because of the rare love they had for each other. To make it more believable, Ms. Balfe could have curled her toes in Season 1 on that rug. I know this will be deleted! And whatever his sexual preference, Sam Heighan deserves to be treated with respect by her and the WHO’s. If he had not found Ms. Balfe attractive when she arrived late for her screening in L.A., she might not have gotten the part. In US culture right now, it’s hard to find a genuinely romantic film. My cable land has mostly violence, horror, or grossly incompetent attempts at comedy. Sam Heughan and the actor that played Dougal MacKenzie are the best things that ever happened to Outlander outside of Herself and an unbelievably talented set of WHOS who allowed current cultural politics to get in the way of the true spirit of the books. Thank you for the opportunity to express my views with no disrespect intended to anyone but my honest observations which may be all wrong.
I read your comments/views with great interest and agree with a fair few of them. Their production was so praised and popular due to the great adaption they did in S1. So, why change it? Definitely a different agenda going on here! It is not only the Jamie character that has been changed, so have recent interviews and promotion panels. I don’t like to make too personal remarks, but this is where I so agree with you. I really do not like the way Ms.Balfe has changed towards her co-star in interviews. It has actually made me start to dislike her. It has gone from great chemistry, he’s great and they are such good friends to separate interviews, belittling him and preferring the snake as favourite co-star! I don’t find it very professional. This does by no means reflects on her great acting when bringing Claire to life on screen. But it is understandable to think, is this connected to the changes made to the Jamie role? to the promoting of Claire as main strong character and Ms. Balfe as better actor? And it is also understandable that some are feeling annoyed by the diminished role of Jamie in OL, the way Sam Heughan is being treated and the way his acting skills are being underused after the way he so brilliantly totally becomes Jamie. And you are also right about the chemistry test screening.
i think what they are doing will bring about discord amongst fans, I have seen a fair few other comments on SM about this topic. These are of course my views and are not aimed at these actors privately.
Agree also Sam’s talents are being underused. He was studying the books and understanding the nuances of his character. He is being wasted.
Caitriona has not changed one bit towards Sam. To blame her for what you see as them short shifting Sam on good lines is a absolutely ludicrous as is crediting Sam for Caitriona getting the part of Claire. Caitriona won that on her own. This Caitriona bashing has got to stop. It is utterly ridiculous.
Well put.
Your take on things and blaming Caitriona is absurd.
Interviews are planned ahead by Starz not actors and never once have I seen or read anything disrespectful of Sam from Caitriona. Your dislike of her is blatant just because Sam is youd favorite. After 4 years of constant shipping them by a few relentless fans they came to the point when they had to cut down the off screen chemistry so that nothing they said was twisted into something completely different.
Stop blaming Caitriona for everything you find wrong with the show and adjust your expectations. She’s not the problem no matter how much you want Sam to be recognized by the industry. What do you want her to do, play down her talent? Be mediocre so that Sam can shine? Both are doing their jobs according to the scripts and directions they get. She’s recognized in the actress category not the male category. They’re not competing against each other! Blaming Caitriona like this is disturbing because it only highlights the revolting attitude some have in their total support of Sam.
As for the nonsense about the ‘gay’ issue, you do know that many of Caitriona’s best friends are gay? Another reason your take on things is completely off. Also, Sam is almost 40 years old and is perfectly capable of speaking and taking care of himself.
If you want things corected or improved in the show stop blaming the leading lady. She’s not the problem.
While I agree, that Cait plays the acting hand dealt to her… she also does not have to sit back and let the blatant feminist scripts slide by and do nothing. Actors have long had input into their characters and how they play them. Cait, otoh, has bought into the #metoo thing and womens marches and the whole fem-nazi bs.. so why should she speak up and point out that Sam is getting crummy scripts. Sadly both are locked into a 7 yr contract. Sam has no real barganing chips. IF he walked the show would fold, no matter how great an actor Cait is.. alas, if he walks he get sued for breach of contract.
As I said before, adapting a book to 10 or 12 hr long tv shows is a daunting task… OTOH, its pure hubris to bring back a creature that has been dead since the opening pages of season 3 simply because the showrunner likes the guy. Frank was a main character and he is dead, leave him that way.. Duncan otoh, yep he is dead..or was.. sliding him into Duncan Innes place with Jocasta is not a hard thing. as he is not a major character. For those who have read the books, spoiler here.. Duncan and Jocasta high tail it to Canada at the onset of the Revolutionary War as they are tories.. I am sure the tv show will change that as well.. it is a small matter..
But in Drums of Autumn, its Jamie who plays a significant role… making him a wimp dominated by Claire, if they do that.. will totally ruin the show.. because in drums he is anything but subservient. He is clearly a Laird in his element. Turning down Jocasta, dealing with the sargent who killed a slave..the governor and starting the town of fraser’s ridge.. Claire and her story really do take a backseat in Drums..
PS.. do not hide my snarky comments behind a fake name either.. mine is up there for the world to see.. Dismaid..and it is CORRECTLY spelled DISMAYED.
It can be spelled anyway one wants when it’s a pseudo. Thanks for nothing.
Keep it civil please guys x
So as a feminist you expect Caitriona to demand changes in Jamie’s part but not have Sam do it on his own? He’s a grown man and he obviously does question scripts as he did with his reaction to Bree’s photos vs Willie’s or the line after her rescues Claire from drowning among others. Both do ask for changes and adjustments which are sometimes accepted but mostly the writers, directors and executives have the final say. The barganing chips are limited to both of them, not just Sam.
Anne – An actor can speak up here and there, but if they do it constantly, they get a rep in the industry for being hard to work with and high maintenance. The production schedule is almost like a military campaign, involving SO many people, materials, places, budget constraints, deadlines, etc. etc. it HAS to keep moving forward. Plus, they are working so constantly, rewrites are happening, and they really only “see” the final at the read throughs (because before that they are doing the prior episode). They have to pick their battles. My impression of Caitriona is that she’s a super intelligent, caring, but no nonsense person. I think she would probably advocate for a fully developed Jamie and Claire and Jamie relationship, if given the chance. I have little doubt.
Regarding bringing back Frank – that character seems to be very interesting and important to Ron, and it’s his show – I think the showrunner should do what makes the project interesting to him, otherwise he will disengage. Remember – Ron did Season 1 and it is fabulous.
Finally, it seems to me, in processing all this, that the term “feminism” is really widely defined depending on who is talking, and that is indeed part of the crux of the matter – the show has a bit of a dated view of what equalizing the sexes means (to me) – It is not to emasculate (deprive of strength or vigor) a male OR a female – it is to allow a person to flourish fully, from the center of who they are (again, in my opinion).
I want a strong, proud, manly Jamie, and a strong, proud, womanly Claire. And, I marched.
Courtney, you nailed it again!!
Your response has little to do with my comments. I blame the WHOS for doing things like having Clare wonder in front of Jamie if she had made a mistake to come back to him. I’ve never commented anywhere except on this blog yesterday and in response to you. Not a shipper, either. The things I said are my opinion and you don’t have to agree. You are a bit disrespectful so please leave me alone.
Dismaid – I think you have a lot of great things to say, and I agree with many of your ideas, actually. But when comments become targeted personally, or insulting to others, I will remove them. We are all passionate in our views, and everyone’s experience is valid for her/him, please consider this when responding to another valued individual. People cannot be open to learning from each other when they feel attacked…
Hi M. E., thanks for commenting. Your views aren’t all wrong (you remind me of my mom), they’re YOURS – which makes them absolutely true, for you. I think Sam and Cait are very close friends, and that the whole shipping thing has made them tone down their off screen playful moments (just my opinion). Cait loves to tease Sam, that’s part of their relationship. I can’t blame Caitriona for making a movie with George Clooney – that’s good for her career. The show has to take some creative license, or it would be no fun for them, again, my opinion. I also preferred the version of killing Dougal with Jamie only. The raunchy sex comment was made by the interviewer, and Caitriona actually corrected him. I love the curling toes idea! I agree – Outlander is the best thing on TV – I hate all the violent sick-o (to me) stuff that is on TV nowadays – it comes from Diana’s amazing work, and that’s why we’re all so passionate about it…
So when I watched true blood, it was long after the series ended.. and I had never read the books.. had I done so, I would have stopped watching after the first season..
I see a similar trend, but not so blatant in Outlander. It is always difficult to adapt a book, or series of books for TV/movies. To keep the essence of the book, the highlights that tell the story and remove the extraneous parts.. which to keep and which to go.. without destroying the storyline can be a daunting task…
That said…..
In the 18th century feminism did NOT exist. Women were most definitely 2nd class citizens, legally owned by their husbands or other male family members.
That Jamie is forward thinking/enlightened enough to treat Claire as his equal is extraordinary. Sadly the writers and showrunners seem to think that injecting 21st century fem-nazism and political correctness is a proper adaption of the book.. I strenuously disagree.
Outlander and Dragonfly in Amber were excellent adaptions. I have always felt that dragonfly is one of the weakest books of the series. What was done to Voyager was a travesty.. Frank and Helwater were only comprised about a third to a half of the book.. the voyage, the other half. I was dismayed to see the short shift they gave to the jamaica portion of the book. Making Willoughby into a kinda normal nice guy was just ridiculous.. he was a creep and should have stayed that way..
Someone mentioned that Jamie acted like an adolecent when back at Lallybroch over the rents and stuff.. well he did in the book as well.. and NO he had NO idea that Leery had turned Claire in as a witch.. he discovered that after the Claire/Leery confrontation.
Frank has NO business in season 4…. he is dead. leave him there.. stop trying to promote Cait over Sam… and stop the PC feminist crap… I have already pretty much decided I am done with the TV show.. I sure as hel won’t be subscribing to Starz this year when it is run..
Rarely does Starz promote Caitriona. They never did anything to help before or after any nominations she has received. Maybe, if they did, as other networks do for their leads and shows, she may have won the GG by now. Even fans have noticed and raised their concerns with Starz both on Twiter and IG. Most of Starz’s tweets and IG posts have Sam/Jamie as #1. Even now as they press for an EMMY, who had the IG for the day, was praised the most and pushed? It was mostly about Sam.
Caitriona is a brilliant actress in her own right and whatever nominations and awards she’s received and won where totally earned and deserved. She’s not the reason why Sam hasn’t gotten any.
Outlander may or may not continue through all books but pitting the cast against each other speaks more about fans than anyone associated with the show.
I have felt Jamie has been weakened it cut at the knees ever since Claire came up with the idea to portray herself as a victim, as a captive when young LJG tried to kill Jamie. And Jamie had to have help in killing Dougal. A true highlander wouldn’t need a woman who telling him what to do. We all know Claire is a strong woman. But all the female fans of this show want a strong male leader, the one we fell in love with from the books. The one who stood up to Claire and put her (or anyone else) in her (their) place when it was needed. She wasn’t right ALL the time, no one is.
Please do not speak for all female fans. I am fine with the show and in reality i think i dont think that show Jamie has been weakened at all by the writers. But to be honest Jamie is not my favourite character in the books or the show. And i am very sickened by all of the Caitriona/Claire bashing. There were times in the books that Claire had to put Jamie in his place too.
Hi KC and ASA – I am OK with open discussion as long as it’s respectful. I don’t see Cait bashing in ASA’s comment. And I agree with you KC – not all female fans feel the same (we all know that), and I WANT Claire to put Jamie in his place, just as I want Jamie to do the same with Claire – more balance is what I (me, speaking for no one else but myself) would like to see in the leads. And it’s fine that Jamie is not your favorite character, variety is the spice of life. It’s even OK with me if someone doesn’t like someone’s acting, as long as they say it respectfully, as their own opinion – nothing more and nothing less… Thanks for commenting.
Just saw this. Yes, I agree, I just started reading the books after S1E4 and have finished them all. My husband suggested we watch the show together, but he hasn’t read the books, and he has seen my disappointment when the show makes Claire look so much more in control and full of all the wisdom and good ideas, even stealing things from other males, but mostly from Jamie’s character. I liked how the show rewrote some things, but in most cases, I was disappointed that Sam is not allowed to play JAMMF as the incredibly strong, fully aware, intelligent, educated, naturally alpha male leader that men want to follow. THAT man is more than a match for Claire, but the Jamie they have been giving us is barely up to the task–he is not her equal–and in the books, he knows better than Claire does the ramifications of everyone’s actions on any given situation much more astutely and grasps all of the options available much more quickly than she does (unless we’re talking medicine, which is a different story). It goes along with his being a chess master. He is that way in life, too–understanding the undercurrents of any given situation, even understanding both his and Claire’s (and often other characters’) reactions to a situation or contributions to a situation rapidly and figuring out a way to deal with them almost as he understands the problems that will arise–instantaneously. He knows which moves to make, Claire follows his lead on everything just about, except when she has to help someone (slaves, hurt/injured people, etc). Jamie knows when he has to work around her, but most of the time, he is making decisions, and they are great ones, and they take everyone into consideration. He has a tremendous amount of self control, learned through not only his early experiences before meeting Claire, but also in the years of their separation. There is no way this man has to look for Claire to guide him, and I dearly wish they would write him the way he is in the books so we could all bask in and enjoy their wonderful relationship where they are strong enough for each other and complement each other and NEED each other equally. I do hope the showrunners and producers and writers and network will hear the fans, Sam and Caitriona are outstanding at what they do, and their work brings this amazing story to life for us, but we need more Jamie. (the real one) Courtney–are you forwarding all this to the showrunners?? (Just curious)
Loved your comparison to the game of chess- perfect analogy. Diana has said books are about JAMMF as told by Claire. I have started watching the podcasts for the first time and have an appreciation for how much the producers and writers care about Outlander so I don’t know where this change has come from but it is clear they have tipped things toward Claire. I sincerely miss the balanced team they are in the book with a progressive Jamie the chess player, Claire’s knowledge of the future and medicine all set in the male dominated 1700’s.
I am not sure if the writers pay any attention to blogs etc. but he reaction to this topic here and many other places should at least clue the OL team that there is a problem of some sort. There are those fans that insist that any slightly negative mention about Cait or Jamie be taken as “insults” and “back-stabbing”. I am not talking about “like” . If you simply add up the scenes from the book that were Jamie’s idea or he showed leadership and compare them to the show where Claire comes up with the idea or takes leadership- it is not even a contest-it is a set of factual numbers.
My point is not just the numbers, but rather that Claire seems to be the #1 leader and Jamie just a reactionary character. Book Jamie froze and lived in almost rags at Helwater-he was a devout man who did not sleep with other women, but show Jamie looked really fine so the aspect of him being blackmailed by G was not as much of a big deal. It was filmed romantically. He almost seemed her equal and his sacrifice to save his family was left out of the show when he explained Willie to Claire. His misery over losing Faith was cut- he has a temper tantrum and gets tossed in the brig and tries to bribe Fergus ? Those are NOT the characteristics of a leader or a man of intelligence and in control.
I was recently searching for something to watch that was similar to Game of Thrones and/or Ken Follett’s Trilogy and Outlander was offered. I have read the books and have watched Seasons 1/2, but will agree with many of the previous comments….Season 3 was truly awful. I suggest you give some serious thought to leaving the 21st century out of the American Revolution and allow good actors to accurately portray the male and female figures they have been chosen to represent I can watch reruns of High School Musical instead of rolling my eyes through another awful series of Oultander.
Well said. Here’s hoping the writers & show runners agree.
You totally nailed that. With respect but truth. The produced version has become very female centric..and that’s not I believe, what Diana has written in her wonderful books. These two characters are very much equals in their distinctive ways..and I would so much prefer to see that played out more authentically by the wonderful Catriona and Sam.
I know for a fact that as each season progresses, some original supporters have dwindled..yes new fans have been picked up,and maybe they warm to the female centric screen version. However, I for one grow more and more disappointed in the dilution of Jaimies character with each new season..hanging on to the dwindling snippets of them both to the fore on screen.
And this is compounded when I see so much terrific footage that is cut out of the final edit, much of which contains superb Jaimie scenes or outstanding Claire and Jaimie scenes.
I really hope they redress the balance for future sereii.
Cait and Sam are fantastic! Love them
Both. The issue is with the writing. They changed Jamie’s character and therefor Claire’s character. Neither of them deserved the change, it’s not helping the story and neither their characters. Jamie is not the K of M anymore; he is not the kind, smart, strong, powerful, tender, loving, fierce man and Claire is not the kind, smart, fierce, determined and loving woman anymore. They are not equals anymore. If there was a reason why I got hooked with the show and later on with the books is bc of the equality between the main characters. They need eachother to be who they truly are. And now, this has change and not for the best. As a huge fan of Claire and Cait from the beginning it saddens me to see the changes, I don’t recognize my fav character. And yes,even being a huge Claire/Cait fan it saddens me to see how diminishing the show is towards Jamie. The result? They are not lifting Claire’s character, they are actually taking both down!!
In regards of the awards… they both deserve the nominations and awards but truth be told Sam has it very difficult bc his lines and scenes are not as dramatic or powerful and he is not getting the key moments, Balfe is. Again, even as a Balfe fan , more than Sam’s, I don’t like this. It’s not even fair! They both. Should have the same time, the same drama, the same chances. Still, very very happy for Balfe. She deserves it. We fans want the power couple back! We want our J n C back and we want our S n C back. We want equality. B4 is my fav I hope they get it right and they bring back Claire and Jamie back to who they are. And as for Sam and Cait.. just want them to succeed but not At the expense of the other. The production and writers and even cast needs to step up the game!! And again, the cast does what they are told to do. I don’t think neither of them has anything to do with the turn the show took.
Everytime I read this kind of article I feel less alone. We have talked about this many many times reaching the same conclussion. but yes, I´d say that diminishing Jamie they are not actually lifting Claire´s . I´m strong believer on the idea that the changes in the story and characters not only harmed the show and the story, no matter what the production and thE LOVE-ALL fans say, but also Claire´s. I´ve been a Claire fan from Ep1 (I actually got hooked to the show bc of her)I love her story and how she lives it but since all these changes I have never seen so many complains and comments about Claire and therefor Cait. Diminishing Jamie and therefor Sam hasn´t only hurt the show/sam/jamie but also brought a lot heat to Claire and Cait. Since the big changes, lines, story, characters core values, attitude etc.. Balfe has maybe got more nominations than Sam but it also brough her a lot of heat. My question is …is it worth? If you knew me you´d know how much a like Claire and Cait (although she seems changed as well, not as much the fun, down to earth actress from previous interviews ) but it saddens me to see how much dislike this changes are bringing to the character and actress. So, my conclussion, and this is not a defend Claire /Cait rant-just an attempt for fairness, the changes have hurt everything….Sam with the lack of strong lines and script, Cait, getting into a hate/dislike atmosphere, Jamie, only viewed and percieved as a dull yummy piece of meat just “eye candy”, and Claire turning a beautiful character with strong believes into a sour person (hate to say this). My question is who benefits of all this? Does the production know about this? do the actors know what´s going on? do they care? Love the show but I wonder if the show runners really care about ALL the respectful comment, good or bad, or just read, know what they want to hear. I dont remember reading about so many concerns, worries, fear, and dislike after s1-s2. Of course, there are also many many many people who loved it and they must be respected but what abouut the ones who are thinking about S4 being the last chance of getting hooked again? Sorry, i know I´m late on this post but just read it for the first time!
Hi Keesh, It’s never too late to make a comment… I think the showrunners, actors and everyone involved do care, a lot, but I think that the blistering pace of a tiny break after Season 2, and then no break between Season 3 and Season 4 gives them little to no time to reflect and see where their work is going, they’re literally just cranking it out and trying to get through the days, I would imagine. There has also been huge turn over in the writers room. I think in Season 3, we did see Jamie and Claire sometimes, and much of the time we saw a few people’s idea of how to portray a “strong woman,” (which to me, was outdated).
Holly Richter-White of Outlander Cast blog wrote an answering blog to this piece: http://www.outlandercast.com/2018/05/outlander-the-starz-tv-show.html and I am actually working on a follow up piece, but it might be a while before it comes out. I too am very curious to see what Season 4 yields. I support the production whole heartedly, and I will be honest and say, if they continue down the same path, the show, and the project as a whole will become less interesting to me. We will see… thanks for your comments. – Courtney
Can’t they just let Frank and Black Jack rest in peace so we’re not reminded of the hell of that whole ordeal? I keep seeing hints that he may return.
The comment that modern feminists have used the show as a bully pulpit and turned Alpha male Jamie from the books to beta male Jamie on the show was frequently mentioned by fans during season 3 on this blog and other fan pages and now season 4.
I am done… I ubderstand a tv show and book will have deviations to make. I am good with that… I am not good with the continued modern treatment of Jamie.
I have a Starz,membership until the end of November. IF season4 ep1 is any indication
I doubt I will renew.
The acting is wooden, film editing abysmal, the wigs they wear horrible and obvious…the quality has gone down.
The only way to get our point across is to walk away…Stsrz only understands disappearing viewers.
YMMV
I have no issue with the acting or any aspect of the show other than the writer’s deviations from the book. So far, season 4 only bears a slight resemblance to the book. Too many important scenes and content have been completely left out or changed as to be nothing like the journey the characters take.
They’ve even changed the “voice” of some of the characters. The show character bearing no relation to the books bar name and occupation.
They are rushing through the Bree/Roger story. By not having some characters or situations they have changed very important plotlines for future shows or deleted them entirely.
I know that some things have to be changed but prior to this season they were relatively careful. Now every episode so deviates from the story that watching it is frustrating and no longer enjoyable.
i am new to Outlander – only discovered it this fourth season, but after watching seasons 1-3 i agree with everyone. for a long time i have felt claire wears the pants in the family and Jaime is, well, as my husband would put it pussy whipped. as i watched season 4, that feeling did not change. while i understand the story is Claire’s, i think they need to re-establish Jaime as a strong husband whose ideas are worthy and do not need to be always second guessed and acquiesced to Claire
Linda, the Jamie of the books is a strong male. He and Claire are very much a matched pair.
The 1st 2 seasons,are excellent….it started 2 go downhill with season 3.
Season 4 was just awful…. the whole fem-nazi writers thing just drove me away. I understand parts of the book needs to be cut out to fit the tv show. But to use the platform to spew politics irritates me.
In the book Jamie and Claire row across a pond, discussing slavery. It was a powerful moment. Unlike the episode where Claire rants,like a demented banshee about the evils of slavery.
Starz and Outlander lost me as a viewer. I did not purchase season 3 or 4 on dvd. It is a waste of my $$$$.
Everything you said is correct.
FYI people: Feminism is not about diminishing men. That’s the dumbed-down right-wing crap version of actual feminism, which is fully respectful of men as the equals of women. And “Feminazi” is a brain dead reactionary slur. About Outlander, I agree that both Jamie and Claire aren’t quite what they were in S1, 2 and 3. I also hate to see the drop off in chemistry between SH and CB. In some episodes of S4, they look kind of pissed off at each other even when the script doesn’t call for it. I also agree they’re making Claire look too old.
Natalie, how about keep your virtue signaling leftist politics to yourself. Fact season 4 was a femnazi fest. Quite obviously you slept thru history class when it came to understanding the social mores of Colonial America. The leftist female writers completely rewrote history…. they ignored important plot points that Claire needed to establish herself as an accepted physician in a time period where it wasn’t until 150 yrs,later women were accepted as physicians. Claires PC antislavery rant was totally unacceptable in the society of the time….point in fact it would,have made her and Jaime pariahs in the very society they needed to establish themselves. Her quiet rant to Jamie while out on the pond (in the book) was far more powerful.
Slavery was as controversial then as it was 100 yrs later. Turning Claire into a dominant whining harpy and Jamie into her love struck subservient subordinate is exactly what Terry wanted in the beginning and all but said so…add some woke leftist writers…and voila a joke of a tv show.
I dont expect the writers to exactly follow the books…. there were major plot points that could easily be followed. But to attempt to rewrite history from a woke femnazi PC view is just stupid. Season 4 was just badly written…the acting wasn’t too hot either.
I am not the only person who has offered these points of view.
My family has,been in NC since well before the revolution..understand at least getting history and social customs correct, whether one agrees with them or not, is the least a writer can do.
NO, I wont be watcching season 5. Esp after the post by Starz,President. Maybe Ron and friends will get the message when they see a,large drop in viewership….or not….
Lastly, I am the granddaughter of a suffragette. I was reared in a conservative feminist household in 1950s and 60s.. You have NO idea,what you are talking about when you lay your crap about “right wibg”… it is just virtue signaling and unbecoming.
Dearest Anne and Natalie,
Clearly, you are both intelligent, passionate, educated Outlander fans and women, I thank you for your participation here. I do request that we all do ourselves, and each other the service of refraining from demeaning, name calling, or clumping people together in groups disdainfully in our comments.
I welcome respectful, intelligent, civil discourse. Thanks to you both.
– Courtney
Natalie, about Claire’s age. Book 1, Outlander had her about 28 and Jamie around 23.
She went back Thru the stones 20 yrs later. That would make her about 48.
By the time S4 opened… 2 or 3 yrs,have passed…she would be about 50.
So yeah, her makeup is close to the age.
That wig is awful though. Lol…
Sorry Courtney…. wont happen again
Anne
Thank you Anne – I value your participation here! xo
Hello Everyone
I very much agree that they`ve taken most of us out of the story by making show Jamie a shadow of the man he should be.
However, and at risk of being crucified here, I think it`s partly because of how the actor plays the role and not just the fault of the writers and directors IMHO. Even in interviews, Sam seems to take his cues from Cait in mannerisms and body language (much in the way a person defers to a sibling who is a year or two older than them) This also comes across subtly during their on-screen time and it has nothing to do with the scripts they`re given or in how they`re directed to take action. And of course, if Jamie is subtly taking cues from Claire then Jamie is bound to come across as being subservient to her.
Someone mentioned Jamie/Sam`s ability to be nuanced in his acting and expressions even with the little he`s given but IMHO if this was the case then Jamie should be able to use nuance to dominate the screen even during instances where Claire is given the powerful dialogues. (e.g. You know how some people are able to command respect and attention as soon as they enter a room without even holding any power? or how the sheer presence of certain people is able to overshadow even the powerful speech of the one in charge? I think Sam lacks such presence and that is one thing our king of men is supposed to have. With that being said, I don`t think it`s all due to the actor either as some of the scenes the writers write Jamie in is clearly reductive to his character.
i have noticed sam with cait – taking cues, repeating what she has said, but i do believe it is more shyness than anything. he has said he is more comfortable when he is in a role speaking as a character rather than giving interviews etc. it’s just not in his wheelhouse. i do hope with him becoming a producer they will bring Jaimie more in line with the books. claire is always so aggressive and he always seems to acquiesce to her character almost as if he is excuse the phrase here – pussywhipped. i hope they bring jaimie back into his leadership role
Sincerely appreciate all your comments. I read much of comments the above and I honestly did not notice that drastic change until season 5 when it became so obvious that at times It was hard to watch. Regarding Jamie’s change after Claire came back I can totally understand his humbled disposition due to fear (of perhaps even phobia) of loosing her again. Loosing her was so deeply painful and lasted so long that he became a totally different person. J.F. is loved not only for his masculinity but also for being a very humble man, being able to apologize and change when necessary even though It runs against the culture of the times (as in the case of his apology in the reckoning episode). The experience of loss took his humble disposition to a whole new level, so much so that he is perfectly ok with allowing her to have more of a leading role. As he said in the wedding night episode (I told him that I am completely under your power and happy to be there) what is that if not a willingness to take on a secondary role and when necessary to step forward and take on a leading role. Sincerely appreciate all your comments. F.C.
Loved season 1 of outlander, I started watching season 4. Lots of changes, not for the better, where have the strong characters gone? Characters stumbling through each episode now instead of the survivors of season 1, predictable and repetitive, river boat trip looked super imposed. Told my husband not to buy me any more outlander dvds as birthday/christmas gifts as they getting worse with each series. What a shame, what market are the makers pandering to?