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
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.