Top 10 Differences Between Outlander Books & TV Show
video description
Date: 2023-11-20
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 30
Leslie
Just 10? I have 30 written down just off the top of my head. Aside from one episode, the story IS told from Claires POV. These are not chronological. : Tamis Baxter does not exist in the books and that screen time would have been far better spent on Claire helping Losgann deliver a foal, an act that led to Colum giving Claire a jet rosary that Jamie subsequently used to save Claire at the witch trial. On the show Willie remembers Mac the groom. In the show Jamie knows the part Loaghaire played in almost getting Claire burned as a witch. In the book, Claire saves Jamies hand at Eldridge Manor with the help of Macrannoch, awake, with Jamies sense of humour in full display, and Jamie removes the signet ring brand the JACK put on him, not something Jamie did to himself. Murtagh, Jamie and Claire escape to the coast where they boarded the Cristabol to go to the abbey run by Jamies uncle Alexander. Jamie develops a terrible fever and very much wants to die. Claire once again saves him, using opium, the smell of lavender (Jacks favorite sent, a knife, and, as Jamie describes it later as fornication of his demons. They spends weeks at the abbey. And Jamie always believed Faith was conceived the first time they were intimate without the dark cloud of Jack. In the book Jamie is not arrested by redcoats, but by the Watch, having been betrayed by Ronnie MacNab, who was subsequently murdered by the other men of Lallybroch. The Watch were never invited guests at Lallybroch and we only see Horrocks the one time. Neither Claire (who would not have a clue how to find where Sandringham is staying) nor Jamie and Murtagh visit Sandringham, there is so dual, Jamie isnt in a fight with the MacDonalds, amd isnt banished from Leogh, anymore than Dougal is. While at sea I search of the Bruja and its important cargo (a kidnapped Ian, the Artemis is boarded by the Bruja, and Claire is seriously injured, not some scratch from a tree, but a slash from oxter to elbow, Yi Tien Cho puts 42 stitches in Claires arm using the acupuncture needles to dull the pain. They end up with a black slave who they rescued from the ocean who had seen Ian on the Bruja. In the Mohawk village to rescue Roger, Ian doesnt just choose to stay for no reason, he has met Mohawk woman (Works With Her Hands, who Ian calls Emily) and wants to stay because he loves her. Somehow the show writers have forgotten Brianna is an MIT engineer and reduce her to little more than a breast for Jemmy. Roger, who was the youngest professor at Oxford at the time he travelled is painted in the show as some idiot. The eye exam Claire gives him (with a reading chart done in Shakespeare lines instead of random letters) proves that Roger has a perfectly logical, medical reason he shoots so badly, and Claire tells him he can tell the sharp shooters that he (has the eyes of a hawk, as hawks have the same kind of vision. At NO point, until the birth of Amanda does Roger EVER want to return to the future. Jamie asks him on a number or occasions and her ensure all concerned he wants to stand by Jamies hand. The show wasted 3 gemstones that will desperately needed after Amanda is born. The ridiculousness of Jamie fighting a Indian dressed as a bear, instead of what ACTUALLY happened, which is he fights a live bear. And all the stuff with the Natives at the beginning of the season is all in the show writers imaginations, none of that happened in the book. Nor was the Mueller family murdered by the Natives. The hernia repair happens to John Quincy Myers on Jocastas dining table, not at the theatre, and certainly not in the presence of George Washington who Jamie and Claire do not meet until book 8. The amount of money Geiliss had stolen from Arther was 10, 000 pounds sterling not 1, 000. The amount agreed upon to pay Laoghaire? 1200 pounds sterling, not 20. And Claire doesnt get her beautiful Highland wedding ring until they return to Leoch. Is that 10?
reply
Just 10? I have 30 written down just off the top of my head. Aside from one episode, the story IS told from Claires POV. These are not chronological. : Tamis Baxter does not exist in the books and that screen time would have been far better spent on Claire helping Losgann deliver a foal, an act that led to Colum giving Claire a jet rosary that Jamie subsequently used to save Claire at the witch trial. On the show Willie remembers Mac the groom. In the show Jamie knows the part Loaghaire played in almost getting Claire burned as a witch. In the book, Claire saves Jamies hand at Eldridge Manor with the help of Macrannoch, awake, with Jamies sense of humour in full display, and Jamie removes the signet ring brand the JACK put on him, not something Jamie did to himself. Murtagh, Jamie and Claire escape to the coast where they boarded the Cristabol to go to the abbey run by Jamies uncle Alexander. Jamie develops a terrible fever and very much wants to die. Claire once again saves him, using opium, the smell of lavender (Jacks favorite sent, a knife, and, as Jamie describes it later as fornication of his demons. They spends weeks at the abbey. And Jamie always believed Faith was conceived the first time they were intimate without the dark cloud of Jack. In the book Jamie is not arrested by redcoats, but by the Watch, having been betrayed by Ronnie MacNab, who was subsequently murdered by the other men of Lallybroch. The Watch were never invited guests at Lallybroch and we only see Horrocks the one time. Neither Claire (who would not have a clue how to find where Sandringham is staying) nor Jamie and Murtagh visit Sandringham, there is so dual, Jamie isnt in a fight with the MacDonalds, amd isnt banished from Leogh, anymore than Dougal is. While at sea I search of the Bruja and its important cargo (a kidnapped Ian, the Artemis is boarded by the Bruja, and Claire is seriously injured, not some scratch from a tree, but a slash from oxter to elbow, Yi Tien Cho puts 42 stitches in Claires arm using the acupuncture needles to dull the pain. They end up with a black slave who they rescued from the ocean who had seen Ian on the Bruja. In the Mohawk village to rescue Roger, Ian doesnt just choose to stay for no reason, he has met Mohawk woman (Works With Her Hands, who Ian calls Emily) and wants to stay because he loves her. Somehow the show writers have forgotten Brianna is an MIT engineer and reduce her to little more than a breast for Jemmy. Roger, who was the youngest professor at Oxford at the time he travelled is painted in the show as some idiot. The eye exam Claire gives him (with a reading chart done in Shakespeare lines instead of random letters) proves that Roger has a perfectly logical, medical reason he shoots so badly, and Claire tells him he can tell the sharp shooters that he (has the eyes of a hawk, as hawks have the same kind of vision. At NO point, until the birth of Amanda does Roger EVER want to return to the future. Jamie asks him on a number or occasions and her ensure all concerned he wants to stand by Jamies hand. The show wasted 3 gemstones that will desperately needed after Amanda is born. The ridiculousness of Jamie fighting a Indian dressed as a bear, instead of what ACTUALLY happened, which is he fights a live bear. And all the stuff with the Natives at the beginning of the season is all in the show writers imaginations, none of that happened in the book. Nor was the Mueller family murdered by the Natives. The hernia repair happens to John Quincy Myers on Jocastas dining table, not at the theatre, and certainly not in the presence of George Washington who Jamie and Claire do not meet until book 8. The amount of money Geiliss had stolen from Arther was 10, 000 pounds sterling not 1, 000. The amount agreed upon to pay Laoghaire? 1200 pounds sterling, not 20. And Claire doesnt get her beautiful Highland wedding ring until they return to Leoch. Is that 10?
reply
Jean
Keeping a popular actor (that I also love) was a very bad plot change, completely messing up the important and juicily complex Jocasta character plot and the people involved. The neglect, or telling, of so many secrets, sent main characters down roads they would not have taken because in the book series, they knew or did not know them. Fatal flaws to the personalities of main characters. Errors the author did not make, because she kept them true to their natures. Unnecessary stories and character lines were added that interfered with telling the story and developing the essential characters. Once Jamie and Clair landed in the colonies, the errors multiplied on the errors, and there was no way back. At least Murtagh (a more intelligent and developed character than the book Murtagh finally met his demise and was mourned, even by me, but it was too late, the damage to the plot is done, and even Diannas fine craft could not save it. I will say that inserting Dougal McKenzie actor into the sons roll was perfect. He has a big roll to play, and he is a known quantity who will certainly handle what is to come, IF the story goes back to the book for its plot. Not sending Brianna to Lallybroch, because the Jenny actor was not available, was terrible idea. Like The Character Clair mentioned when she could not tell the truth, she stuck as close to the truth as possible. The writers should have learned that lesson, too, and given the work to Ian, that actor could have handled it just fine without having to write a whole new, and clumsy plot line. Stick to the book truth, as much as possible. Jamie could have told Geneva his book truth, once in, I dont think I can stop. Jamie was celibate and strongly under control, but under those circumstances, Im wondering if even the King of Men could have stopped once in. (Ill take the flak on that statement; I was a rape victim, and yes, he could have stopped, but not, I think, if Id allowed him in first. I did not let him in, and fought him all the way. But those were days very, very long ago, when women were always guilty when raped, and were socially, and emotionally blackmailed into consequences, of which pregnancy was only one of many, and much of it was societal and religious ownership brainwash. Things, I hope, were getting better. But we are not as civilized an animal as we pretend. That fact has become very clear these days. But that IS an entirely different discussion)
reply
Keeping a popular actor (that I also love) was a very bad plot change, completely messing up the important and juicily complex Jocasta character plot and the people involved. The neglect, or telling, of so many secrets, sent main characters down roads they would not have taken because in the book series, they knew or did not know them. Fatal flaws to the personalities of main characters. Errors the author did not make, because she kept them true to their natures. Unnecessary stories and character lines were added that interfered with telling the story and developing the essential characters. Once Jamie and Clair landed in the colonies, the errors multiplied on the errors, and there was no way back. At least Murtagh (a more intelligent and developed character than the book Murtagh finally met his demise and was mourned, even by me, but it was too late, the damage to the plot is done, and even Diannas fine craft could not save it. I will say that inserting Dougal McKenzie actor into the sons roll was perfect. He has a big roll to play, and he is a known quantity who will certainly handle what is to come, IF the story goes back to the book for its plot. Not sending Brianna to Lallybroch, because the Jenny actor was not available, was terrible idea. Like The Character Clair mentioned when she could not tell the truth, she stuck as close to the truth as possible. The writers should have learned that lesson, too, and given the work to Ian, that actor could have handled it just fine without having to write a whole new, and clumsy plot line. Stick to the book truth, as much as possible. Jamie could have told Geneva his book truth, once in, I dont think I can stop. Jamie was celibate and strongly under control, but under those circumstances, Im wondering if even the King of Men could have stopped once in. (Ill take the flak on that statement; I was a rape victim, and yes, he could have stopped, but not, I think, if Id allowed him in first. I did not let him in, and fought him all the way. But those were days very, very long ago, when women were always guilty when raped, and were socially, and emotionally blackmailed into consequences, of which pregnancy was only one of many, and much of it was societal and religious ownership brainwash. Things, I hope, were getting better. But we are not as civilized an animal as we pretend. That fact has become very clear these days. But that IS an entirely different discussion)
reply
Yvonne
I've been frustrated at the many ways the show has deviated from the books. I know the books are 'huge' but to remove scenes from the book to then invent ones for the screen? doesn't make any sense. However, current circumstances have made me a little more understanding (although still not impressed) - in the UK we have Captain Tom Moore (100) who has raised millions for the NHS walking 'laps' around his garden. The generation of 'just get on with it'. Life has changed so much and I think the show's creators whilst making tremendous efforts to get the historical facts and looks right have failed abysmally in getting the characters right. The age you live in colours your view of things. My biggest gripe is that the writers have failed to keep the 'essence' of the characters and have looked far more at formulaic episodes than telling this beautiful story. Can't end this without saying 'poor Roger'. He had an awful time in the books but his onscreen life is even worse because they've changed him into a whiny 'I want to go home', can't do anything right sort of person when he was really much stronger than that. One tiny example - onscreen Jamie tells him he must kill Stephen Bonnet and Roger can't see himself taking a life. Book Roger asks Jamie to teach him to fight because he knows he must kill Stephen Bonnet.
reply
I've been frustrated at the many ways the show has deviated from the books. I know the books are 'huge' but to remove scenes from the book to then invent ones for the screen? doesn't make any sense. However, current circumstances have made me a little more understanding (although still not impressed) - in the UK we have Captain Tom Moore (100) who has raised millions for the NHS walking 'laps' around his garden. The generation of 'just get on with it'. Life has changed so much and I think the show's creators whilst making tremendous efforts to get the historical facts and looks right have failed abysmally in getting the characters right. The age you live in colours your view of things. My biggest gripe is that the writers have failed to keep the 'essence' of the characters and have looked far more at formulaic episodes than telling this beautiful story. Can't end this without saying 'poor Roger'. He had an awful time in the books but his onscreen life is even worse because they've changed him into a whiny 'I want to go home', can't do anything right sort of person when he was really much stronger than that. One tiny example - onscreen Jamie tells him he must kill Stephen Bonnet and Roger can't see himself taking a life. Book Roger asks Jamie to teach him to fight because he knows he must kill Stephen Bonnet.
reply
fanjoy
Book Frank was vocally anti-adoption when he and Claire had trouble conceiving before she traveled, for Claire that really stung. But he did a 180 in the books and adored Bree at first sight. I don't think he knew for sure about his own infertility until years later.
Another book thing was the Frank/Claire age gap. In Voyager Claire mentions him being in his late 40s when Bree's 3 months old, so Claire's just 30-31. Claire married Frank at 18-he was a professor where her great-uncle was head of the dept. IIRC, Claire wasn't Frank's student, but that's how they met. Never hated Book Frank but he was very much a guy born in 1901 or so.
Even without the time travel, IMO Claire/Frank would've grown apart, before she traveled she had moments of chafing at being the demure professor's wife type. I preferred the book's take on their relationship, both before Claire traveled and after her return. The marriage was strained but very much real, they still shared a bed and Claire spent years being suspicious about Frank hooking up with various younger women at the university. Echoes of how Claire/Frank met, plus Claire cheated with Jamie, and Frank could always tell how much more she loved Jamie than him.
reply
Book Frank was vocally anti-adoption when he and Claire had trouble conceiving before she traveled, for Claire that really stung. But he did a 180 in the books and adored Bree at first sight. I don't think he knew for sure about his own infertility until years later.
Another book thing was the Frank/Claire age gap. In Voyager Claire mentions him being in his late 40s when Bree's 3 months old, so Claire's just 30-31. Claire married Frank at 18-he was a professor where her great-uncle was head of the dept. IIRC, Claire wasn't Frank's student, but that's how they met. Never hated Book Frank but he was very much a guy born in 1901 or so.
Even without the time travel, IMO Claire/Frank would've grown apart, before she traveled she had moments of chafing at being the demure professor's wife type. I preferred the book's take on their relationship, both before Claire traveled and after her return. The marriage was strained but very much real, they still shared a bed and Claire spent years being suspicious about Frank hooking up with various younger women at the university. Echoes of how Claire/Frank met, plus Claire cheated with Jamie, and Frank could always tell how much more she loved Jamie than him.
reply
Raphale
I think there was also a small detail changed that changes everything: Black Jack and his brother Alex look a lot alike. like so alike that Claire first thinks she is in front of Black Jack when she meets him. I think, even though it would have been complicated for the actor to play three different roles, that it should have been played by Tobias Menzies. For Claire and Jamie, it was very important because, not only is Black Jack a sort of demon haunting them, he is also the face of Claire's husband, Frank. The first closest and most familiar person Claire has ever had since her uncle and it is the first face she meets when she travels and then, that familiar face turns into the face of a monster but she doesn't completely loathe her husband after her first travel because it was also the face of a pious and gentle man like Alex Randall. The same face covers three different personas she has met and she has to deal with it from three different ways.
But with Alex who's played by a different actor. all the grief she feels when she looks at Jack, Alex and Frank is gone.
reply
I think there was also a small detail changed that changes everything: Black Jack and his brother Alex look a lot alike. like so alike that Claire first thinks she is in front of Black Jack when she meets him. I think, even though it would have been complicated for the actor to play three different roles, that it should have been played by Tobias Menzies. For Claire and Jamie, it was very important because, not only is Black Jack a sort of demon haunting them, he is also the face of Claire's husband, Frank. The first closest and most familiar person Claire has ever had since her uncle and it is the first face she meets when she travels and then, that familiar face turns into the face of a monster but she doesn't completely loathe her husband after her first travel because it was also the face of a pious and gentle man like Alex Randall. The same face covers three different personas she has met and she has to deal with it from three different ways.
But with Alex who's played by a different actor. all the grief she feels when she looks at Jack, Alex and Frank is gone.
reply
Shelley
Got to be honest, have loved the books so much and cant wait for Bees to come out. The series started off really well but has faltered for me. Bree, Roger, Fergus and Iain are all wrong! Its not the actors, it's the script and character deviation. Love Murtagh, but again, why this weird storyline with Jocasta. kind of spoils a different plot line, just for the character to still go nowhere. Bree isnt strong enough, Roger is whiney, Ian too wet. although since his return it looks a bit more promising, Fergus and Marsali lines almost non existent! Claire has no sense of humour and hasn't got the earthiness of the book character, it's been expunged, and Jamie has become very mono dimensional, again, no sense of humour showing. So, who are these people? Next season, let's get the characters back on track please scriptwriters! If they stray any further I will probably give up watching the show!
reply
Got to be honest, have loved the books so much and cant wait for Bees to come out. The series started off really well but has faltered for me. Bree, Roger, Fergus and Iain are all wrong! Its not the actors, it's the script and character deviation. Love Murtagh, but again, why this weird storyline with Jocasta. kind of spoils a different plot line, just for the character to still go nowhere. Bree isnt strong enough, Roger is whiney, Ian too wet. although since his return it looks a bit more promising, Fergus and Marsali lines almost non existent! Claire has no sense of humour and hasn't got the earthiness of the book character, it's been expunged, and Jamie has become very mono dimensional, again, no sense of humour showing. So, who are these people? Next season, let's get the characters back on track please scriptwriters! If they stray any further I will probably give up watching the show!
reply
safetyqueen22
There are two changes on this list that make me sad. 1. Bree giving birth for the reasons mentioned in the video. It would have been so moving! 2. Jamies reaction to Brees photos. The book reaction seems much more likely to seeing a photo the daughter youve never met. Not that Sam didnt kill it in that scene anyway and the bikini thing is from the book just a later point. I like the fact that he immediately tells Claire about Willie in the show unlike in the book. The Laoghaire thing I can live with because in the show Jamie seems to marry her more for a ready made family than herself and she was young when she did that. People can grow. Also I always thought it odd in the book that Claire never told Jamie what she did. I agree about Frank being a more likeable character in the show but also Tobias Menzies is just so DAMNE charismatic.
reply
There are two changes on this list that make me sad. 1. Bree giving birth for the reasons mentioned in the video. It would have been so moving! 2. Jamies reaction to Brees photos. The book reaction seems much more likely to seeing a photo the daughter youve never met. Not that Sam didnt kill it in that scene anyway and the bikini thing is from the book just a later point. I like the fact that he immediately tells Claire about Willie in the show unlike in the book. The Laoghaire thing I can live with because in the show Jamie seems to marry her more for a ready made family than herself and she was young when she did that. People can grow. Also I always thought it odd in the book that Claire never told Jamie what she did. I agree about Frank being a more likeable character in the show but also Tobias Menzies is just so DAMNE charismatic.
reply
TheBossLadyA
I never heard about the books until I started watching the show (am reading them now, so I'm definitely not in the camp that says the books are better. It's certainly not true that books are ALWAYS better than the screen adaptation, but it's called adaptation for a reason. If you know a lot will have to be cut out (especially with books that are so long) then it should go without saying that other things will have to be changed to make the TV version make sense. Maybe people wouldn't be so disappointed if they watched it for what it is. I'm finding it fun noting the differences, but I would rather watch the show. Some people will never even read the books, and I think the show runners have done a great job balancing that with the super high expectations of the readers.
reply
I never heard about the books until I started watching the show (am reading them now, so I'm definitely not in the camp that says the books are better. It's certainly not true that books are ALWAYS better than the screen adaptation, but it's called adaptation for a reason. If you know a lot will have to be cut out (especially with books that are so long) then it should go without saying that other things will have to be changed to make the TV version make sense. Maybe people wouldn't be so disappointed if they watched it for what it is. I'm finding it fun noting the differences, but I would rather watch the show. Some people will never even read the books, and I think the show runners have done a great job balancing that with the super high expectations of the readers.
reply
LB
In the books, which I just started after the season 5 finale, I am now just starting book 6, I like the communication. The communication between Jenny and her knowing more about her son. Really irritated that they left out the letter from Ian Sr. to Jaimie about keeping Ian in the colonies. It was so heartwarming to know that as scary as it must sound to Ian Sr, he knows his son well enough to know it's the only place that can provide him opportunities. Even if it means he likely will never see him again. On the show, it kind of feels like from Jenny's POV, they just absconded with her son and they rarely touch base again. She is so much more of a character in the books. They all are, that's why I decided to finally read them.
reply
In the books, which I just started after the season 5 finale, I am now just starting book 6, I like the communication. The communication between Jenny and her knowing more about her son. Really irritated that they left out the letter from Ian Sr. to Jaimie about keeping Ian in the colonies. It was so heartwarming to know that as scary as it must sound to Ian Sr, he knows his son well enough to know it's the only place that can provide him opportunities. Even if it means he likely will never see him again. On the show, it kind of feels like from Jenny's POV, they just absconded with her son and they rarely touch base again. She is so much more of a character in the books. They all are, that's why I decided to finally read them.
reply
Tamsin
Firstly it isn't Science fiction - it's Magic so it is still fiction but based in magic not Science! Also I am fed up of Claire being called Sassanach. Sassana is England and Sassanach is an English person. She should call him Albanach which is a Scottish person. Mise Tamsin agus mise Eirennach - I am Tamsin and I am an Irish Person. Celtic languages ten to be gender friendly. You aren't called a man or a woman but a Person - very advanced for an ancient culture! But back to my main point. How would any woman respond to being called English Person or American Person or any nationality -person. I doubt if that woud be perceived ss affectionate! no matter how softly said. However Sassanach does NOT mean Outlander!
reply
Firstly it isn't Science fiction - it's Magic so it is still fiction but based in magic not Science! Also I am fed up of Claire being called Sassanach. Sassana is England and Sassanach is an English person. She should call him Albanach which is a Scottish person. Mise Tamsin agus mise Eirennach - I am Tamsin and I am an Irish Person. Celtic languages ten to be gender friendly. You aren't called a man or a woman but a Person - very advanced for an ancient culture! But back to my main point. How would any woman respond to being called English Person or American Person or any nationality -person. I doubt if that woud be perceived ss affectionate! no matter how softly said. However Sassanach does NOT mean Outlander!
reply
Cath
Frank in the series, and Tobias Menzies's portrayal of him, is SO much better than the book. It gave me a lot of sympathy for the man. As for Claire's POV there are many points in the later books where Claire has no view. storylines of Lord John, Bree, Jamie etc that are clearly not in her POV. Murtagh's non-death is a sore spot for me as it is much more interesting IMO to see how Jamie goes through life without the major Father figures he grew up with. True Murtagh is missing from most of Jamie's post-Culloden life but the moments Jamie goes through mourning Murtagh, his grief changing through time (as grief does, his memories of Culloden resurfacing, those are great parts of the books.
reply
Frank in the series, and Tobias Menzies's portrayal of him, is SO much better than the book. It gave me a lot of sympathy for the man. As for Claire's POV there are many points in the later books where Claire has no view. storylines of Lord John, Bree, Jamie etc that are clearly not in her POV. Murtagh's non-death is a sore spot for me as it is much more interesting IMO to see how Jamie goes through life without the major Father figures he grew up with. True Murtagh is missing from most of Jamie's post-Culloden life but the moments Jamie goes through mourning Murtagh, his grief changing through time (as grief does, his memories of Culloden resurfacing, those are great parts of the books.
reply
Mark
Some of the changes have been good. I'm glad they made Mr Willoughby less cartoonish for example. But I too felt they dropped the ball with Claire and Jaime's reunion. Same with Fergus meeting Claire again. Something between the book and what we got would have been better. I think they also screwed up a bit with Bree. I like Sophie Skelton, so it's nothing against her. Dropping the whole lizzie with Pneumonia arc and having Bree collapse near Laoghaire's home both served to undercut just how capable Bree had been in getting to the colonies in the book.
reply
Some of the changes have been good. I'm glad they made Mr Willoughby less cartoonish for example. But I too felt they dropped the ball with Claire and Jaime's reunion. Same with Fergus meeting Claire again. Something between the book and what we got would have been better. I think they also screwed up a bit with Bree. I like Sophie Skelton, so it's nothing against her. Dropping the whole lizzie with Pneumonia arc and having Bree collapse near Laoghaire's home both served to undercut just how capable Bree had been in getting to the colonies in the book.
reply
Chris
Jocasta did have a romance and a marriage in the books; she began a romance with her black butler even before her abusive first husband died, and when Jaime and his buddy Duncan (a former Ardsmuir prisoners who has mostly been left out of the TV series, Jocasta decided to take Duncan as a 2nd husband though she didn't love him, so that she would have a man to handle her business. Pretty much all Duncan's contributions in the books parts were given to Murtagh instead, since the TV series decided to resurrect Murtagh, and to leave Duncan out.
reply
Jocasta did have a romance and a marriage in the books; she began a romance with her black butler even before her abusive first husband died, and when Jaime and his buddy Duncan (a former Ardsmuir prisoners who has mostly been left out of the TV series, Jocasta decided to take Duncan as a 2nd husband though she didn't love him, so that she would have a man to handle her business. Pretty much all Duncan's contributions in the books parts were given to Murtagh instead, since the TV series decided to resurrect Murtagh, and to leave Duncan out.
reply
sillygirlkc
It's always interesting when a character becomes beloved in the on screen portrayal and the changes they have to adjust to the story going forward. The other example I think of a lot is Lafayette from True Blood (RIP. He was such a phenomenal actor/character that they wrote him in for so long. Needless to say opinions on the show aside, the deviation from the story in the books was kind of mind boggling. Can't wait for the updated list after the next season. Cuz I have questions after finally finishing books 6 and 7.
reply
It's always interesting when a character becomes beloved in the on screen portrayal and the changes they have to adjust to the story going forward. The other example I think of a lot is Lafayette from True Blood (RIP. He was such a phenomenal actor/character that they wrote him in for so long. Needless to say opinions on the show aside, the deviation from the story in the books was kind of mind boggling. Can't wait for the updated list after the next season. Cuz I have questions after finally finishing books 6 and 7.
reply
Laurianne
One of the differences that was huge for me was the return of Roger after being rescued from the Mohawk. In the TV Show, everyone is happy and it seems to be no problems with that but in the books, Bree takes a lot of time to accept what he did and he has to stay away from here until she decided that she forgave him. Anyway, it ended up well but still, this is important for their relationship!
And of course, letting Murtagh alive in the TV show was very strange!
reply
One of the differences that was huge for me was the return of Roger after being rescued from the Mohawk. In the TV Show, everyone is happy and it seems to be no problems with that but in the books, Bree takes a lot of time to accept what he did and he has to stay away from here until she decided that she forgave him. Anyway, it ended up well but still, this is important for their relationship!
And of course, letting Murtagh alive in the TV show was very strange!
reply
Keren
considering the point of view, it's not completely correct that we only see a claire point of view in the books. in the books from the second book we start to see Roger's point of view as well and in the third book we start to see Jamie's point of view and from the fourth, we also start to see Breanna point off view.
Also Frank in the books is rarely mentioned as a bad character as they did in the show in the matter of fact he is rarely mentioned as a general rule.
reply
considering the point of view, it's not completely correct that we only see a claire point of view in the books. in the books from the second book we start to see Roger's point of view as well and in the third book we start to see Jamie's point of view and from the fourth, we also start to see Breanna point off view.
Also Frank in the books is rarely mentioned as a bad character as they did in the show in the matter of fact he is rarely mentioned as a general rule.
reply
jamey
jamie and brianna meeting for the first time. was SUCHA DISAPPOINTMENT. i feel as tho the ball was dropped. Jamie is very smart and always aware. how did he not know it was her, especially since he just dreamt about her recently (where he saw a birthmark that claire never told him about. If he figured out who lord john gray was 10years later. i feel like he wouldve known immediatly. Brianna shouldnt have had to say a word after she got his attention.
reply
jamie and brianna meeting for the first time. was SUCHA DISAPPOINTMENT. i feel as tho the ball was dropped. Jamie is very smart and always aware. how did he not know it was her, especially since he just dreamt about her recently (where he saw a birthmark that claire never told him about. If he figured out who lord john gray was 10years later. i feel like he wouldve known immediatly. Brianna shouldnt have had to say a word after she got his attention.
reply
JC
Why are there so many shows that feel it is important to criticize the differences between the books and the series? Let's face it, they are both excellent and if the books were to be followed word for word, there would have to be a lot more episodes which would, most likely, run the costs up so much that we would probably only get a few less seasons thus condensing them even further. We should be happy we get what we do!
reply
Why are there so many shows that feel it is important to criticize the differences between the books and the series? Let's face it, they are both excellent and if the books were to be followed word for word, there would have to be a lot more episodes which would, most likely, run the costs up so much that we would probably only get a few less seasons thus condensing them even further. We should be happy we get what we do!
reply
Jack
Never read the books, but I was (and still) hoping for Brianna meeting her aunts and other cousins later in the show. Or maybe meet her half brother. Season 5 is ok at best, but I feel they left out so much. The first 3 seasons was amazing, but kinda died off later. I get it, the show would be even longer if they kept most of the story from the books. Still a great show. Looking forward for season 6 though
reply
Never read the books, but I was (and still) hoping for Brianna meeting her aunts and other cousins later in the show. Or maybe meet her half brother. Season 5 is ok at best, but I feel they left out so much. The first 3 seasons was amazing, but kinda died off later. I get it, the show would be even longer if they kept most of the story from the books. Still a great show. Looking forward for season 6 though
reply
Deanna
I started reading Cross Stitch (the original name of thefirst book) back in the 80s and got each of the books as they came out.
For 11 years Jamie and Claire have been running down a hillside to greet Rodger and Brianna coming back from the 1980s!
Eleven years!
This show Absolutely gutted everything honorable about the books. I watched the first season and then deleted Starz. Disgusting.
reply
I started reading Cross Stitch (the original name of thefirst book) back in the 80s and got each of the books as they came out.
For 11 years Jamie and Claire have been running down a hillside to greet Rodger and Brianna coming back from the 1980s!
Eleven years!
This show Absolutely gutted everything honorable about the books. I watched the first season and then deleted Starz. Disgusting.
reply
Noelia
I'm watching Outlander now (a little bit late) and I felt SO disappointed when they get back together after 20 years of suffering and missing each other. I was holding my breath! And then. Nothing. Oh you're here, cool. I have a meeting now, would you mind? I just couldn't believe it. The writing until that point was so good, how could they ruined THE most important scene ever?
reply
I'm watching Outlander now (a little bit late) and I felt SO disappointed when they get back together after 20 years of suffering and missing each other. I was holding my breath! And then. Nothing. Oh you're here, cool. I have a meeting now, would you mind? I just couldn't believe it. The writing until that point was so good, how could they ruined THE most important scene ever?
reply
Briar
The biggest scene missing from this list is Brianna going to Laoghaire's when she first arrived in the past. None of that junk happened. I really hope the writers don't G. O. T. Outlander and make it Soooo unrelated from the direction the author wanted/wrote. PLEASE SAVE OUTLANDER from writers with too big of egos they must change things
reply
The biggest scene missing from this list is Brianna going to Laoghaire's when she first arrived in the past. None of that junk happened. I really hope the writers don't G. O. T. Outlander and make it Soooo unrelated from the direction the author wanted/wrote. PLEASE SAVE OUTLANDER from writers with too big of egos they must change things
reply
ranchofiesta
TV series cuts so much of Lord John! Book version of Brianna giving birth - not only that Claire and Jamie were there for it but the conversation between Claire and Lord John is hysterical, as well as the conversations between Brianna and Lord John when he comes to River Run (when Jocasta is trying to marry her off)
reply
TV series cuts so much of Lord John! Book version of Brianna giving birth - not only that Claire and Jamie were there for it but the conversation between Claire and Lord John is hysterical, as well as the conversations between Brianna and Lord John when he comes to River Run (when Jocasta is trying to marry her off)
reply
Kitty
So I've only seen season 1 and most of season 2, and there is rape and attempted rape in like, every other episode. But they drew the line at Jamie forcing himself on a woman who changes her mind at the last moment? Not that I am okay with any of it. but that was the one that made them pause? I'm glad I stopped watching.
reply
So I've only seen season 1 and most of season 2, and there is rape and attempted rape in like, every other episode. But they drew the line at Jamie forcing himself on a woman who changes her mind at the last moment? Not that I am okay with any of it. but that was the one that made them pause? I'm glad I stopped watching.
reply
Alexandre
I'm glad they've let Murtagh live longer. The character is different from the book not only with when he die but how he was. In the show he has a great personnality and his attachment to Jamie is really great. Me and my wife expected his death but it was still really shocking. We will miss this character.
reply
I'm glad they've let Murtagh live longer. The character is different from the book not only with when he die but how he was. In the show he has a great personnality and his attachment to Jamie is really great. Me and my wife expected his death but it was still really shocking. We will miss this character.
reply
Judith
I just found Outlander and started watching in 2022 without having read the books. I was disappointed in Jamies reaction to Claires return, but very much in his response to seeing photos of his daughter. I will definitely want to read the book and get a better sense of what Jamies reaction.
reply
I just found Outlander and started watching in 2022 without having read the books. I was disappointed in Jamies reaction to Claires return, but very much in his response to seeing photos of his daughter. I will definitely want to read the book and get a better sense of what Jamies reaction.
reply
Roxi
I really hated that the show was different than the book in The Reckoning because there was such an uproar by non-book readers when Jamie punished Claire. In the book he told her to remain with Will and told her that if she didn't what would happen to her. It's not like she wasn't warned.
reply
I really hated that the show was different than the book in The Reckoning because there was such an uproar by non-book readers when Jamie punished Claire. In the book he told her to remain with Will and told her that if she didn't what would happen to her. It's not like she wasn't warned.
reply
Jean
I will never forgive the way the birth scene was handled. Jamie being there to hold her hand throughout led to forgiveness and Claire being there to deliver their grandson would have been so beautiful. Who was the idiot that thought that didnt matter? Instead their reunion was so meh!
reply
I will never forgive the way the birth scene was handled. Jamie being there to hold her hand throughout led to forgiveness and Claire being there to deliver their grandson would have been so beautiful. Who was the idiot that thought that didnt matter? Instead their reunion was so meh!
reply
Magpie
The WORST departure from the book was Jamie not crying over the photographs of Brianna and then immediately telling Claire about his son, William. Completely destroyed the sense of despair he had endured over their time apart and dismissed Brianna in favour of his son.
reply
The WORST departure from the book was Jamie not crying over the photographs of Brianna and then immediately telling Claire about his son, William. Completely destroyed the sense of despair he had endured over their time apart and dismissed Brianna in favour of his son.
reply
Sara
Lissie is a giant,
Brianna meeting Jamie,
How Brianna forgives Robert,
Brianna's eye color,
how Brianna's is a head-strong, fearless, amazon in the books, including wearing beeches when she goes back in time.
And Sophie's terrible acting.
reply
Lissie is a giant,
Brianna meeting Jamie,
How Brianna forgives Robert,
Brianna's eye color,
how Brianna's is a head-strong, fearless, amazon in the books, including wearing beeches when she goes back in time.
And Sophie's terrible acting.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
