Outcasts

Ursa major

Ursa major

Bearly Believable
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
24,309
Location
England
So, is anyone going to be watching this 8-part BBC series about colonists on a distant world?

(The world is called Carpathia. It can't be an attempt to draw in people who watch programmes about vampires, can it?)







** - I'm not sure it's deliberate, but the security chief is apparently called Isen, which may allude to Isengard. :)
 
Hoban... Washburne.

All a bit crappy so far really. I'm not really a fan of Hermione Norris. Her face annoys me.
 
I'm watching it now. The story hints at much deeper layers and complex character histories that will only slowly be uncovered. There has been some disaster on Earth, and this is set ten years later on a distant planet where the survivors have washed up. It remind me of Earth 2 and I think there will be similar mysteries about the planet that we have yet to find out. There is a division between the scouts who relish their freedom, but have made the colony possible, and the other settlers who have done some reprehensible things for the greater good of the colony. Something happened after the children fell ill and people were quarantined. Some people were meant to have been executed, but instead were allowed to escape. It ended with the destruction on re-entry of a ship from Earth, but a few survivors in lifeboats escaping.

I also hoped that it might be what Survivors could have been a few years on if that hadn't been cancelled. Unfortunately, it isn't as good as Survivors.
Ursa major said:
The world is called Carpathia. It can't be an attempt to draw in people who watch programmes about vampires, can it?
Click to expand...
The world is named for the first ship to rescue survivors from the RMS Titanic.
 
Not sure if this'll always happen, but episode 2 is tomorrow, so more explanation may be forthcoming then.
 
I quite liked it, sure it had a lot of SF cliches in but they were not too badly done and the production values were quite good. It made a change from Cop shows anyway. (And Jamie Bamber in a vest is always easy on the eye:D;))
 
Dave said:
I think I was a little disappointed in the lack of exposition. I do like mystery, but there just seemed to be a lot of unanswered questions in this first episode.
Click to expand...
I think I'd prefer (so far) unanswered questions to too much info-dumping. But with new arrivals ... er ... arriving, there will be more opportunities for various explanations. (This episode, we only had the transporter captain to ask for information that everyone already on the planet knew.)
 
It's been absolutely torn to shreds on digital spy, which surprised me. I thought it was decent, and worth watching the next episode.
Worryingly, it's setting is similar to my WIP, but my settlers have moved on from using walkie-talkies.
 
alchemist said:
It's been absolutely torn to shreds on digital spy,
Click to expand...
I just took a look at their thread, and I'm not sure "torn to shreds" is warranted. "Nitpicking" certainly, and they said much the same as I did - a bit like 'Earth 2', why did they cancel 'Survivors' for this, lack of exposition - the other things I also agree with - "its very beige", "the people are clapping", clumsy dialogue and poor child actor. But there were also people saying, "if you didn't like it, don't come back again tomorrow." They were also comparing it to 'Bonekickers' - I can't agree there - nothing could be quite as bad as 'Bonekickers'! I will be watching again, if just to get a few answers.
 
SJAB said:
I quite liked it, sure it had a lot of SF cliches in [it]
Click to expand...
  • a secret community of clones
  • a rag-tag army struggling against a technological superior foe
  • a chaotic world in which humans can no longer procreate
  • attempts to find a cure to an illness which affects only children
  • each and every character has a tainted history
  • a token black guy
  • a token American
  • the clones grow to match the cloned person's state of physiological development in a small fraction of the time (less than 15 years but they look 20 to 30 years old.)

I also quite liked it. ;)
 
Dave said:
the clones grow to match the cloned person's state of physiological development in a small fraction of the time (less than 15 years but they look 20 to 30 years old.)
Click to expand...

I thought the clones came to the planet as soldiers; I didn't think those on the planet had created them. Though that was only thanks to one line of possibly misheard dialogue, so I could be wrong.
 
HareBrain said:
I thought the clones came to the planet as soldiers; I didn't think those on the planet had created them. Though that was only thanks to one line of possibly misheard dialogue, so I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
I missed that part then, and it would explain it, thanks. But they keep mentioning them as an 'experiment' (which could be an 'experiment in soldiering'). The leader of the Clones also asked if Tate could tell him who his father was - which doesn't mean he created him, but he isn't very likely to know if he didn't create him - I see now it was meant sarcastically.
 
Isn't Tate the leading representative** of the organisation that both began the colonisation of Carpathia and put in place the technology, including those clones, that facilitated it? In which case, Tate would be the person to ask about the origin, technical and biological, of the clones.







** - Or was until Mr Berger arrived.
 
alchemist said:
It's been absolutely torn to shreds on digital spy, which surprised me. I thought it was decent, and worth watching the next episode.
Worryingly, it's setting is similar to my WIP, but my settlers have moved on from using walkie-talkies.
Click to expand...

Digital Spy is a rather strange and scary place, I'm not sure I'd trust there opinion on wha to have for lunch. So it should be quite good.

I'm saving up the episodes to watch on Iplayer.
 
I'm not sure what to think of the fact that absolutely everyone seems potentially morally grey, almost to the same degree, but no one is an obvious baddie. "Grey area" characters are widely held to be a sign of greater realism, but when done to this extent it feels a bit contrived.

The series doesn't seem to be doing anything wildly original so far. Yes, characters are the basis of a story, but it would be nice to have some original ideas too. Still, I'm cautiously optimistic that it will be worth continuing with.
 
Dull and univentive so far.

The characters are mostly uninteresting and you don't care if they live or die. The only really interesting one thus far was killed off in the first episode.

The writing and the characters reflect the usual BBC corporate mindset when it comes to such shows. They are simply unable to write good sci-fi because they are too PC and uninventive.

Watch the ratings plummet and I would be amazed if this gets a second series.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top