A few weeks ago, I stumbled upon this article about Outlander. I know I said before that I was somewhat disappointed in this season because they changed some of the little things that I’d been looking forward to, but all in all, I’m actually quite satisfied with the television adaptation.
The accuracy actually makes it more fun for me, because I get to see the major storylines – including some of my favorite parts – come to life. And I know it’s going to be good, because all of the actors are amazing.
I may be picky about some things, but overall, I trust the writers because they consult Diana Gabaldon – she’s literally the first person in the end credits, which means they care about getting it right. And I don’t think Diana would let them get away with too many changes. If it’s good enough for her, it’s good enough for me.
The best changes that they’ve made are the ones that blend in with the storyline so well that it’s not obvious they’ve changed anything. And if I find out that the writers did in fact change something, I don’t even care because it was so much fun to watch.
Blowing things out of proportion much?
This article, on the other hand, is a bit ridiculous. Yes, I noticed that Jamie wasn’t holding his grandson in the season finale. But is it really that much of a disappointment for some people? Honestly, I couldn’t have cared less.
Is “Why didn’t Jamie hold his grandson?” really something worth writing an entire article about? It kind of seems like the writer was grasping at straws to find a topic because they needed to meet a deadline.