U.S. Premiere Date for 'Outcasts' - Jamie Bamber News
Unofficial. Fan Run. Squeeing is not only welcomed, but encouraged.
zegeekgirl
jamiebambernews
zegeekgirl
U.S. Premiere Date for 'Outcasts'
BBC America's press site has announced that Outcasts will finally premiere on U.S. television on Saturday, June 18th at 9 p.m. ET/PT.  For those who haven't been following along, note that Jamie ONLY appears in the first episode.

To compensate in advance for the lack of extensive Bamber, I offer this screencap:

 

You're welcome. ;)

(Also note that if you're multi-region capable, the Region 2 DVD of Outcasts Series 1 - which, it appears, is actually now the complete series as the show has not been renewed by the BBC - is available NOW.)

Tags:

5 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
scifishipper From: scifishipper Date: April 21st, 2011 01:05 am (UTC) (Link Me)
Hello gorgeous! Thanks as always for putting Jamie on my f'list. <3<3
From: (Anonymous) Date: April 21st, 2011 07:21 pm (UTC) (Link Me)
Even though I haven't heard good things about the show, I have to say the bearded adventurer look really suits him, just my thing!
And a lot of reviews specifically singled out Jamie in a positive sense and said he was really missing in the rest of the eps...
asta77 From: asta77 Date: April 21st, 2011 07:50 pm (UTC) (Link Me)
I'm biased, of course ;), but Jamie was definitely one of the best things about the first episode. I watched the second episode and was bored to the point of almost turning it off. I heard the series got better as it progressed and I may give it another try on BBCA to see if that is true. But definitely tune in for the premiere. :)
zegeekgirl From: zegeekgirl Date: April 21st, 2011 08:04 pm (UTC) (Link Me)
I watched the series all the way through to the end (right up to the deeply unsatisfying conclusion; they must have been quite confident they were going to get a second series. :P ), and despite also being slightly biased, obviously, I have to agree. Jamie brought a lot of charisma and depth to the proceedings, although I should note that there were other really good one-off performances. Of particular note, I think in Episode 5: Juliet Aubry (who of course turned up in the first series of LOUK as Emma Sandbrook, the mum-slash-callgirl murderess) played another expeditionary, a single mum who comes back from a mission and some VERY weird shit starts to happen. She was very good, also, and actually her storyline made me question elements of Mitchell (Jamie)'s backstory in a way that I thought was really interesting. Of course, that didn't pan out like it had hoped, but it did make me really wish that the series had more of a focus on the dynamic between the colony and the mysteries of the planet using the expeditionaries as the focus and the intermediary. I found those roles so much more interesting and well-played than most of the principle characters; when strange stuff starts to happen w/ them, what does it mean for the colony at large? (In a perfect, self-contained eight-part series, maybe they could have pulled that off; because they were clearly aiming for a longer run, you've got the whole Julius Berger sub-plot which I found completely predictable and could have done without.)
zegeekgirl From: zegeekgirl Date: April 21st, 2011 08:20 pm (UTC) (Link Me)
*CORRECTION!: The Juliet Aubrey episode is 1x06, not 1x05. ;)
5 comments or Leave a comment