Grade the 'Outlander' Season 2 premiere:

9 Comments

  • Rosalind Therrien - 4 years ago

    I was in shock and thought I missed an episode or something. Why is she and how did she get to 1948?
    Seque was baffling. I did not like it. Was so relished they switched back to Paris sand the ship.

  • Phyl - 8 years ago

    Starting with the 1940's scene was just weird. I didn't see the point of putting it in there. Producers/directors sometimes like to make things what they think is interesting....it's not! It was totally useless, made no sense, not to mention 'dumb'! I wish they would just stick to the novel's storyline.

  • B O'Sullivan - 8 years ago

    This was a very strange start. Oh and Ann - she was nowhere near the stones when she went back - she was on a ship bound for France!! Please check yourself before insulting others! If she had left the ship then why was this absence from the ship not mentioned by the voice over to at least go 'oh I'm back and with Jamie' !! When she came back to 1745?? So strange

  • Janis Pankoski - 8 years ago

    I agree with the above writers. It makes no sense to throw her back into the 1940's and then send her to the 1740's. I've read all the books and my husband is watching the series with me. He hasn't read the books and I can't explain this ridiculous occurrence. I was very upset because there was no rhyme or reason to mix up the story. It should have followed the books. Please don't do this again.

  • ,mairilyn madden - 8 years ago

    very dissapionted to see the start of season 2 Claire going back to 1948 as when I last watched it end of season 1 she was on the ship going to Paris I hope this gets back to wear it is supposd to be hope it is better this week as had to wait 6 months to be dissapionted

  • Ann - 8 years ago

    Give it time, and you'll understand. Even though they changed it up a bit from the books, you'd understand if you'd read the books. She is near the stones, of course, when she is transported back. Once she stepped off the plane in Boston, she was transported back to where they left off in the storytelling. I thought it was very well done. Don't worry, the next episode and thereafter will be with Jamie and Claire at the point where Season 1 ended. By the time we reach the end of the season, you'll understand. Unfortunately, brilliant storytelling was too complicated for a few of you. Fortunately, the majority of those who responded "got it" and could appreciate it.

  • Martha triplett - 8 years ago

    Never so disappointed, after waiting for it seemed like forever for the 2016 series, ...they're on a ship headed to France, ...And then WALLA ...Claire is suddenly back in 1948 , I felt like I was trippin, ....May not watch again.

  • Maureen Bayer - 8 years ago

    I cannot see why she was transported to her time when she was no where near the stones. It felt like the cutter spliced in the return to her time in the wrong place. Poor, poor story telling! Much more of this and I will move on to a better written show. Story telling not sex makes for great writing!

  • C Thompson - 8 years ago

    why in the world would the producer put the 1940's episode in this section? so totally inappropriate and purposeless. i was awaiting a confession of gross mistake on their part that they'd mixed up the seasons accidentally aired the wrong segment. What possessed them???

Leave a Comment

0/4000 chars


Submit Comment