Four people holding hands across a mossy stone wall in the hills
Series review

Outlander: Blood of My Blood

2025 · Created by Matthew B. Roberts · Series · MPA TV-MA

In a sentenceJamie’s parents get a series; Claire’s parents get a subplot and a very long drive north

The Scottish Highlands, early in the eighteenth century. Red Jacob MacKenzie (Peter Mullan) is laird of Clan MacKenzie, and his sons Colum MacKenzie (Séamus McLean Ross) and Dougal MacKenzie (Sam Retford) are already circling the chair. Their sister Ellen MacKenzie (Harriet Slater) means to marry for love or not at all; her brothers mean to marry her to whoever strengthens the clan. Into the gathering that will choose the new laird walks Brian Fraser (Jamie Roy), son of the MacKenzies’ old enemy Lord Lovat (Simon Fraser) (Tony Curran). Two centuries on, during the First World War, Julia Moriston Beauchamp (Hermione Corfield) works in a censor’s office and falls in love by letter with Henry Beauchamp (Jeremy Irvine), a soldier at the front. When Henry comes home, the two of them drive north into the Highlands.

Plays from YouTube when you press play; nothing loads from them until then.

Fi1m review

The Highland half of this Outlander prequel is well cast and handsomely made, and Harriet Slater’s Ellen MacKenzie could carry a series on her own. The Beauchamps’ half is thin, the script explains everything twice, and the whole thing is built as a mirror of the parent show.

Matthew B. Roberts, who ran Outlander for most of its life, has gone back two generations. Blood of My Blood is a ten-part prequel that tells how Jamie Fraser’s parents met and, in a second strand running alongside it, how Claire’s did. Diana Gabaldon, whose novels the parent series was drawn from, is among the credited writers. The idea is that the great love story of the original was itself the child of love stories, and that we would like to see them. About half the time, we did.

The half that works is the Highland one. Red Jacob MacKenzie (Peter Mullan) is laird of Clan MacKenzie, and the question hanging over the gathering is which of his sons comes next: Colum MacKenzie (Séamus McLean Ross), the thinker, or Dougal MacKenzie (Sam Retford), the fighter. Their sister Ellen MacKenzie (Harriet Slater) is the prize either would trade for an alliance, and Slater plays her as someone who has already worked this out and is not going to make it easy. Jamie Roy’s Brian Fraser, son of Lord Lovat (Simon Fraser) (Tony Curran), turns up at the gathering, which is the last place a Fraser should be welcome. The two of them have the thing the show needs, which is that they look as though they want to be in the same room. Curran plays Lovat as a man who enjoys being disliked, and he is the best thing in every scene he is given.

It is handsomely made. Four cinematographers, Peter Robertson, Neville Kidd, Alasdair Walker and Søren Bay, share the ten episodes, and between them they keep the glens grey-green and wet and the halls lit by fire, so that faces come out of the dark the way they did in the original. Mike Gunn’s production design fills the MacKenzie seat with smoke, antlers and rushlight rather than polish, and Trisha Biggar’s plaids look as though they have been slept in. Bear McCreary, who scored the parent series, returns, and his fiddle and pipes do the same work they did there. Nothing about the look of it is cheap.

What got at us, and we did not expect it, was Slater in the hall while the men settle her future. She says almost nothing. The camera stays on her while the clan talks over her head, and Slater lets you see her counting the exits. It is the one stretch where the show trusts a face to do the work, and it made us wish it did so more often.

The other half is set two centuries on, around the First World War. Julia Moriston Beauchamp (Hermione Corfield) and Henry Beauchamp (Jeremy Irvine) fall in love by letter, which is a hard thing to put on screen, and the show does not find a way. We get voices over handwriting and two attractive people looking at the middle distance. Then the two strands are arranged to rhyme with each other, and with the original, so neatly that the pattern shows through the story. Corfield and Irvine are perfectly decent. They are given the least to do.

The script is the real weakness, and it is on both sides of the divide. People announce who they are and whom they are related to, and then somebody else repeats it. Murtagh Fitzgibbons Fraser (Rory Alexander) and Ned Gowan (Conor MacNeill), younger versions of characters the original audience already knows, are introduced with the care of a museum label. Four editors, Alanah Jones, Hibah Schweitzer, Michael O’Halloran and Leah Tuscano, cut between the centuries at a rate that sometimes leaves the Highland scenes just as they get going. We were bored during the letters, and then irritated, because we could see the better show waiting in the next scene.

It is a 15 and earns it the way the original did: the sex is frank and unhurried and shot to be tender, and the show believes in love without embarrassment. That belief is its real virtue. It is also why the exposition grates, because a series this sincere should not need to keep explaining its own family tree.

If you know Outlander, the Highland half is worth your evenings and the rest is a long drive north. If you do not, start with the original, where the surprises are surprises rather than homework.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

78
Positive
5
Mixed
1
Negative
0

Most critics warm to the prequel. They find it keeps what made the original work: two romances running side by side, leads with real chemistry, and sex scenes shot with some care. The casting draws the most consistent praise, several critics noting how closely the new actors resemble their Outlander counterparts, and the Brian and Ellen strand is the one most often singled out. Production design and cinematography are admired throughout.

The reservations fall on the script and on the second couple. The Guardian finds the writing exposition-heavy and the premise shaky, yet still calls the show very watchable. Digital Spy goes further, finding the Claire’s parents storyline dull and objecting to a time-travel link between the two families that it thinks mirrors the original too neatly. The AV Club counts that same device among the show’s cleverer touches. Beyond that the spread is narrow, with five of six broadly positive.

The Hollywood Reporter
8 August 2025 · Angie Han
90*

The critic calls the prequel richly imagined, audaciously epic, and unabashedly romantic, praising the intense chemistry between the central couples and the series' uncynical belief in true love conquering hardship. They single out the vivid world-building, lavish production design, and tenderly shot sex scenes for particular praise.

Read the full review →
Variety
31 July 2025 · Aramide Tinubu
85*

The critic deems it an excellent, highly addictive prequel that stands on its own while retaining the original's addictive qualities, highlighting the electrifying chemistry, nuanced historical detail, and sharp focus on the women's journeys amid patriarchal constraints. They single out the strong casting, steamy scenes, and unforeseen twists for praise.

Read the full review →
The AV Club
4 August 2025 · B+ · Hunter Ingram
83

The critic praises the double romance setup with two compelling couples (Jamie’s and Claire’s parents), highlighting strong performances, steamy scenes, and fan service, calling it a moving and hot addition. They single out the clever integration of time travel and character resemblances.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
9 August 2025
73*

The prequel is a melodrama-packed show with an appalling script and questionable premise, but it remains enjoyable and very watchable nonetheless. The critic singles out the flawless accents of the cast and the spectacular cinematography as the good bits amid the exposition-heavy script.

Read the full review →
Collider
31 July 2025 · 8/10 · Carly Lane
80

The prequel maintains the magic of the original series as a steamy, emotional, and addictively watchable show thanks to strong performances and epic romances. It singles out the phenomenal casting, particularly the striking resemblances and defiant energy in the Brian and Ellen storyline.

Read the full review →
Digital Spy
8 August 2025 · Jo Berry
50*

Praises the Jamie’s parents story for capturing Outlander essence with fighting, rivalries, steamy moments, and lore; complains about the Claire’s parents storyline feeling uninteresting, with an infuriating time-travel twist linking the families that feels wrong and overly mirrored.

Read the full review →

Straight answers AI written, from our review

Is Outlander: Blood of My Blood worth watching?
Outlander: Blood of My Blood is worth watching for anyone who already knows Outlander and wants the Highland half, which is handsomely made and well cast; we scored it 68. Harriet Slater's Ellen MacKenzie and Tony Curran's Lord Lovat carry it. The First World War strand is thin, the script explains everything twice, and newcomers would do better to start with the original.
How long is Outlander: Blood of My Blood, and what is it rated?
Outlander: Blood of My Blood is rated TV-MA by the MPA in the US. It is a drama series.
Where can I watch Outlander: Blood of My Blood in the US?
Outlander: Blood of My Blood is streaming on Starz, Amazon Prime Video, The Roku Channel and Hulu in the US, and it is also available to buy from Amazon Prime Video. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service.
How violent or frightening is Outlander: Blood of My Blood, and is it suitable for children?
Outlander: Blood of My Blood is a UK 15, and it earns the certificate chiefly through sex that is frank, unhurried and shot to be tender rather than through fear or gore. It is not a frightening series. It is not suitable for children, and younger teenagers are better left to the family drama and clan politics in something gentler.

Cast

If you liked this, try…

  1. Outlander (2014) · not on Fi1m yetThe parent series, where the romance has room to breathe and the surprises are its own.

  2. Rob Roy (1995) · not on Fi1m yetHighland honour, wet glens and Tim Roth enjoying villainy as much as Curran does here.

  3. Culloden (1964) · not on Fi1m yetPeter Watkins films the Jacobite defeat as news footage; the plaids look considerably less slept in.

  4. Testament of Youth (2014) · not on Fi1m yetA First World War love story told through letters that actually finds a way to film them.

  5. A Very Long Engagement (2004) · not on Fi1m yetJeunet’s French wartime romance, stubborn and strange, for anyone who wanted more of the Beauchamps.