UK Timeline : Outcasts

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Scary

are you serious anything we make they make better they have better actors and more money for effects i would love it if they did an american version coz are's sucks its boring and predictable and the acting is so poor my two year old could do better

The do have more money. As for better actors, I don't think that's the case. The Americans have some excellent actors. They also have a lot of crap actors.

We have both excellent and crap actors as well.

I have seen cast members in Outcasts that, in other stuff, have been good. Oddly, in this, they seemed wooden which is what makes me think there is something else lacking, like the direction.

Then there is the story which when I last saw it had made no real attempt to explain why these humans were stuck on this planet.

[Chris]

I think the writer and the director have been struggling to convey what is at heart an intriguing proposition. What are they doing on Carpathia? What drove them away from Earth? What are the reasons for the state of the relationships between the key characters?

In the absence of any real inspiration, they have fallen back on dialogue as narrative and as a means of conveying tension. The result is leaden, cliched lines like "be careful out there" whenever someone goes on a mission and endless discussions about the dangers of radiation hotspots, failing crops and dying children. Alfred Hitchcock always insisted that it is fundamental, if you want your audience to feel the tension arising from a ticking time bomb under the table, you must occasionally show them the thing. Had any American TV studio made this series we would have seen at least one stillborn child by now, and possibly a lab full of scientists sweating over the failure of yet another one of their precious, limited seed bank. But all we get is endless discussion of the issue between a jaw-clenching Hermione Norris and Liam Cunningham, who treats everything as if it's the latest turn of events in a Sid Meyer God game.

It's as if the production team has decided that in selecting an unusual South African location they have done their job - so once you get past the impressive backdrop, there is absolutely no sparkle or inspiration in the camerawork or the scene-setting, apart from the irritating and over-used direct light and lens-flare effects.

In Lost, some of the interesting back-story questions were tackled very effectively (for the most part) via the flashback device. It would be difficult for Outcasts to do the same thing because it would be accused of copying. But it desperately needs some other narrative device to help answer these questions (and others). Actually I think it had a potential answer in that dream memory monitoring machine they have. That's a great piece of sci-fi imagnineering but it has been under-used so far.

This week's cliffhanger (the approaching starship that only Julius Berger seems to know anything about) was a welcome addition to the series, as is the President Tate's developing dark side (such as the ease with which he is prepared to treat humans as lab rats), but again, these are all ideas floating in an otherwise poorly-realised and somewhat 2-dimensional universe.

There is a story to be told there somewhere, and that's why I'm sticking with it. But I hope they had the good sense to record two endings to episode 8, and have dusted off the "we're not getting a second series" ending to use a fortnight on Sunday, because I can't see the BBC spending this kind of money on what it now knows is a core audience of well under 3 million.

[Mick Fisher]

Originally Posted by Scary

are you serious anything we make they make better they have better actors and more money for effects i would love it if they did an american version coz are's sucks its boring and predictable and the acting is so poor my two year old could do better

Well they do have more money and of course that does lead to better FX. Unfortunately the reliance on spectacular FX is usually at the expense of a decent story line.

I agree they do have some very good actors but so do we. Unfortunately none of them were contracted to appear in Outcasts.

The problem with Outcasts, apart from the wooden performances, is the story. Whoever came up with the initial premise must have had an acute inspirational by-pass at some time. The 'group of people struggling to survive' in a hostile environment with limited or no technology has been absolutely done to death in a multitude of post apocolyptic and other guises over the years.

Producers love it because it only needs a disused quarry or desert as a location and so can be relatively inexpensive to make.

As for the yanks doing better? I expect they would find a way to introduce the slow moving Zombies they are so fond of but I fear the best script writers in the World would have difficulty revitalising this tired old genre.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Mick Fisher

Well they do have more money and of course that does lead to better FX. Unfortunately the reliance on spectacular FX is usually at the expense of a decent story line.

I agree they do have some very good actors but so do we. Unfortunately none of them were contracted to appear in Outcasts.

The problem with Outcasts, apart from the wooden performances, is the story. Whoever came up with the initial premise must have had an acute inspirational by-pass at some time. The 'group of people struggling to survive' in a hostile environment with limited or no technology has been absolutely done to death in a multitude of post apocolyptic and other guises over the years.

Producers love it because it only needs a disused quarry or desert as a location and so can be relatively inexpensive to make.

As for the yanks doing better? I expect they would find a way to introduce the slow moving Zombies they are so fond of but I fear the best script writers in the World would have difficulty revitalising this tired old genre.

You don't necessarily need high budgets to do good scifi. Some of the original Dr Who stories were amazing, yet done on a shoestring. Also, the film "Moon" was shot on a tiny budget but made for a thoroughly absorbing film.

Anyhow, the thing I expected has happenned. Outcasts has been axed.

I have mixed emotions about this. While I don't think it should have continued in it's current form, I would have liked it if the BBC had gone back for a second series and looked to see what they could improve.

[Mick Fisher]

Originally Posted by Stuart

You don't necessarily need high budgets to do good scifi. Some of the original Dr Who stories were amazing, yet done on a shoestring. Also, the film "Moon" was shot on a tiny budget but made for a thoroughly absorbing film.

I totally agree.

Check out Deuce Of Spades an awesome movie, made almost entirely by the multi talented Ms Granger with (in her own words)no budget.

I guess it takes talent and enthusiasm. Two things conspicuous by their apparent absence on the set of Outcasts.

Originally Posted by Stuart

Anyhow, the thing I expected has happenned. Outcasts has been axed.

I have mixed emotions about this. While I don't think it should have continued in it's current form, I would have liked it if the BBC had gone back for a second series and looked to see what they could improve.

Once again I totally agree but even if anything or anyone could be salvaged from this wreck of a TV show a second series would always be tainted. Much better to throw it away and start with a clean slate and BRING BACK BLAKE'S SEVEN.

[Rob]

Once they moved it to a later Sunday slot you just knew it was finished.

[Peter_]

It was finished after 2 episodes with nowhere to go and the sets looked worse than any 1960's Dr Who set which is pretty bad to say the least.

[Chris]

Well, mrs T and I enjoyed this ... Unfortunately iplayer somehow failed to download the last episode for us, and the BBC seems to be so embarrassed about the show that they have already removed the whole lot, so I can't download it again.

Dont suppose anyone made a DVD recording or a PVR recording they wouldnt mind archiving off and lending us? Even if it was a bit ropey, we spent 7 hours of our lives on it so we'd like to finish it off properly ...

[dilligaf1701]

I still have it on my sky+ and not watched it all yet so I could record it to dvd for you if you like. But I wasn't plan on watching it 'till the weekend.

[Chris]

Well that would be veery kind of you ... No hurry, this evening was the first time since it was broadcast that we actually had a chance to sit down to try to watch it ... We can easily wait a while.