“Epic love stories, they have to have magic in them,” Matthew B. Roberts said on a recent video call. Roberts, wearing a drab, unmagical hoodie, did not look like a showrunner of two of streaming’s swooniest shows: “Outlander,” which will air its eighth and final season next year, and its new prequel, “Outlander: Blood of My Blood,” which debuts on Starz on Friday.
“Outlander,” based on the book series by Diana Gabaldon, details the anguished romance between Jamie (Sam Heughan), an 18th-century Highland warrior, and Claire (Caitriona Balfe), a time-traveling World War II nurse who crosses his path. Alongside “Bridgerton,” which it preceded, “Outlander” has made a wildly successful case for romance as a viable genre on prestige TV, though Roberts doesn’t describe it as a romance. “My definition is: Romances end, love stories continue,” he said.
“Blood of My Blood,” which Roberts often abbreviated to the decidedly less romantic “BoB,” offers two more. In this new series, Jamie’s parents — Brian (Jamie Roy) and Ellen (Harriet Slater) — pursue a forbidden affair in the 1710s, while Claire’s parents — Julia (Hermione Corfield) and Henry (Jeremy Irvine) — strike up an epistolary romance during World War I. And let’s just say that time travel runs in the family, so eventually these stories intertwine. Starz has already ordered a second season, and Roberts is hoping for more.
“If you fall in love with characters on television shows, you can go for as long as that love exists,” he said. Roberts, a believer in true love, discussed heartbreak, fidelity and why he keeps torturing his characters. These are edited excerpts from the conversation.
The “Outlander” books have elements of fantasy and historical drama, but they are very much in the romance genre. Why has it taken prestige TV so long to embrace romance?
With TV reaching more and more people on more and more outlets, you can take a chance. I mean, this was the pitch: A World War II nurse goes on a second honeymoon and touches a rock and goes through time and falls in love with a Highland warrior. But Starz wanted to reach a new audience. And this proved that the audience is out there.
Romance is a genre largely by and for women. What do you bring to it?
I was raised by a single mom and every person in my family right now is a woman, including my dog, so I think I have pretty good perspective. One of the things I often ask the writers before they get hired is if they’ve ever had their heart broken, that rock bottom where your stomach is in knots, where you feel like you’re going to throw up. Those are feelings you need to be able to put onto the page. Luckily, I’ve had my heart broken a few times.
What do you need to tell a great love story?
You have to believe that they were meant to be, you have to have forces pulling them apart. You can’t have a love story without that. Contemporary love stories are very difficult to tell because there aren’t as many constraints to yank people apart.
Do you ever feel bad that you keep pulling the “Outlander” lovers apart? Can’t you just let them be happy?
Trust me, you don’t want to see that episode where they’re just happy. In Season 5, I gave them three-quarters of an hour of happiness when Bree (Claire and Jamie’s daughter) and Roger got married. Then I had to turn it back into “Outlander” again and create some drama. Do I feel bad? No. It feels necessary.
Why end “Outlander” now?
The cast wanted to move on to other things. They’ve been very vocal about that. If they had wanted, I think we would keep going.
When did you start thinking about spinoffs?
Right at the end of Season 4. I had to pitch it to Diana first because I didn’t want to waste a lot of time going down this road if she was adamantly against it. I pitched it to her at a premiere event for Season 5. We were on the panel together and I said, “What do you think of this?” And she said, “I think it’s a good idea.”
There’s very little about Jamie’s parents in the book and even less about Claire’s. Was that a gift or a problem?
It left a lot of room. For “Outlander” we absolutely pull from the books. With “Blood of My Blood,” there’s canon that we definitely pay attention to, but it does give us the ability to go down tributaries that we wouldn’t be able to go down with the books as guardrails.
Do you have a favorite couple?
I don’t play favorites. I like both for different reasons. One is that Romeo-and-Juliet-type love story. They can’t be together and they’re just dying to be together. Then you have this other couple who fall in love through letters. That story came from my dad. In the early days of chat rooms, he met a woman. They sent emails back and forth. He called me one day and said, “I’m going to go see this woman.” I’m like, “Do you know what she looks like?” He goes, “No, it’s OK, I already love her.” They got married and they lived happily until he passed away. So I wanted Julia and Henry to meet that way. When they meet, they already love each other. That’s what makes it magical.
So you have these two couples — fated, magical. How much do you then torture them to tell your story?
A lot. That’s kind of the “Outlander” world, that’s our language. The fans know they’re not coming to a show just to see happy, shiny people doing happy, shiny things. You may have moments that show the bond, but then things are going to get in your way. In “Blood of My Blood” you have rival clans and you have rivals within your own clan, so these dynamics are very important: Who has the power? Who wants the power? Who needs the power? It’s not just happy, loving, family moments.
Why did you want these love stories to intersect?
If we just told these two parallel loves stories, that would get old. You either invest in one couple or the other. So I wanted them to intertwine. In any other world, you would call it coincidence, but in the “Outlander” universe, it’s fate.
Aside from being set a bit earlier, are there ways that this is a different show from “Outlander”?
For one, it’s entirely set in Scotland. Believe it or not, out of eight seasons of “Outlander,” we are only in Scotland for a season and a half. What’s great about “Blood of My Blood” is we can dig into the Scottishness of the show, the clan system and the politics of that. All of that is very different. We don’t deal with family dynamics very much in “Outlander” because it’s all settled by the time we get there.
Did you have to do further research into 18th-century customs or is that second nature by now?
I did a lot when I started “Outlander.” I read a lot about the history of Scotland, I read about the culture. With “Blood of My Blood” I’ve been digging more into more of the mythologies and the stories and the beliefs in fairies and druids.
Is it going to end happily for Claire and Jamie?
Happy is one of those words that’s very subjective.
Well, do you think it ends happily?
I’m very happy with it. I think possibly they might live happily ever after.
Alexis Soloski has written for The Times since 2006. As a culture reporter, she covers television, theater, movies, podcasts and new media.
The post ‘Outlander’: Matthew B. Roberts Loves a Love Story appeared first on New York Times.
