Dr. Pepper Posted April 20, 2016 Share Posted April 20, 2016 6 hours ago, Calibandar said: Somehow it seems unlikely that those were actually the complaints. Quick google on episode two brought me to this review of it: http://www.refinery29.com/2016/04/108537/outlander-season-2-episode-2-recap Of course. Of course. Mr Magnificent. Surely he also plays the Cello and a mean piano piece? Surprise surprise. If he's not dreaming about making love to SuperClaire during the day, it is his every thought at night. On 4/12/2016 at 5:55 AM, Calibandar said: Another one for the ignore list. Snore. Uh oh. You poor wittle thing, looks like you really did fall asleep after your last post. I understand, thinking can be hard for some. I have no idea what point you're actually trying to make because it has little to do with my post. 3 hours ago, Risto said: It is the surprising that man who hasn't had sex in a while would be having sex dreams? We all had them at certain point of our lives. We actually come into manhood with sex dreams. I would point out that the dream was more about his trauma rather than dreaming of having sex with his wife. The episode made clear that he's not having sex with his wife, and even when he tries, he has to stop due to symptoms of PTSD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonCon's Red Beard Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 What's wrong with sex dreams? D: @Risto, I investigated a bit further on this "masculinity" of Jamie's. I haven't yet read the books (I'm in the first chapters of book 1 and I had to drop out of lack of time and language stuff), but for what I could found out, Jamie is a bit more serious in books than he's in the show. Totally understandable that he's more this "I am a man, obey me" type of person here (due to his context), because, Gabaldon, as Martin, wants to be as much as realistic as possible. I also get the appeal this has in certain female readership, as he's also supposed to be some sort of dominant male sexual fantasy. But I can also understand why they decided to change him for the show. In the book, Gabaldon has all the time of the world to develop Jamie, while in the show, not so much. The need for him to be softened and "modernized" is understandable as he needs to be portrayed as a romantic hero. Jamie in books does understand his wife has different views than he has, but this acceptance of him, in show, needs to be more obvious, by portraying him with a bit more of modern views. Sadly, it looks like Jamie has lost a bit of his personality on this, and become a bit more insecure and even childish, according to some readers. I can't neither confirm or deny this bc I haven't yet read him, but I also understand why the change was needed. If they had kept them just like in the book, I suppose he could have ended up being like the 18th Century version of Christian Grey (who is also the 21th Century version or a poorly developed 19th Century teen vampire). On 20/4/2016 at 0:26 AM, SerHaHa said: " First things first... writing erotica for men is waaaaaaaysdaysdaysayayaaaaay harder than for women. I'm not joking. Don't ask, but I'm not joking. " Inquiring minds want to know now... I'm kinda doing it myself. Not writing erotica, but the content is unisex, and certain elements women find appealing (in scenes where sex happens), aren't that much for men, it seems. It's extra harder when I have to write from men's perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humble AK Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Quote I'm kinda doing it myself. Not writing erotica, but the content is unisex, and certain elements women find appealing (in scenes where sex happens), aren't that much for men, it seems. It's extra harder when I have to write from men's perspective. I don't know if it's that mystifying. For female erotica, take the Outlander approach. For the male erotica, take the Game of Thrones approach. Although I'll grant you that either audience it seems embraces one approach and is turned off by the other approach, so they are kind of mutually exclusive. I don't think I've ever read any male-focused erotica - if I want porn, I'm going to watch it, not read it - but I have read female-focused erotica because I find it hilarious. The advantage of the written word is that you can focus on the thoughts and emotional aspects of the situation, whereas the advantage of pictures/movies is that you can focus on the physical, so it's no surprise why consumer behavior for genders is as it is. Still, I'd say that if you go heavy on the sex and light on schmaltzy feelings you'll get your male audience. If you go heavy on the emotions and how special the guy makes the girl feel, you'll get your female audience. Find a way to do both without going overboard one way or the other and maybe you'll find male and females want to read your stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 It's hilarious that you find female feelings hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humble AK Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 11 minutes ago, Zorral said: It's hilarious that you find female feelings hilarious. As done in romance novels I do. They're not realistic, that's the point. Just as the sex in the male-focused porn is not remotely realistic, and I know many females who find that hilarious - in fact, it's often made fun of. The romance in romance novels is not realistic it's all idealized and silly. It's funny to read stuff like: “When the day shall come that we do part," he said softly, and turned to look at me, "if my last words are not 'I love you'-ye'll ken it was because I didna have time.” because no one says these things. It's pretty much the analog to "play with her ass". It's just really funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonCon's Red Beard Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martini Sigil Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 I think Al & Peg Bundy set the romance bar too high for anyone to realistically live up to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Cygne Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 @Theda Baratheon yes, he has lovely red hair! And I love Geillis, too. @Crixus and @Dr. Pepper you rock, love everything you said... @JCRB's Honeypot I read the books and Jamie is pretty much the same on the show as in the books, I don't see any real difference at all. Sam *is* Jamie, he's doing a great job at capturing the book character. I love the show. The costumes are so beautiful, I also like the way she's got a touch of the 40's in her costumes in the past. I love Bear McCreary (the music guy) but wish they had left the opening song the same. If anyone is interested, there are podcasts here, if you start the episode at the same time, you can rewatch while listening to the showrunner and his guests (writers, directors, etc.): https://www.starz.com/series/outlander/more/podcasts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wall Flower Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 6 hours ago, Humble AK said: As done in romance novels I do. They're not realistic, that's the point. Just as the sex in the male-focused porn is not remotely realistic, and I know many females who find that hilarious - in fact, it's often made fun of. The romance in romance novels is not realistic it's all idealized and silly. It's funny to read stuff like: “When the day shall come that we do part," he said softly, and turned to look at me, "if my last words are not 'I love you'-ye'll ken it was because I didna have time.” because no one says these things. It's pretty much the analog to "play with her ass". It's just really funny. Hey, if men talked like that in real life they might get to 'play with her ass' a bit more often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channel4s-JonSnow Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 9 hours ago, Humble AK said: I don't know if it's that mystifying. For female erotica, take the Outlander approach. For the male erotica, take the Game of Thrones approach. Although I'll grant you that either audience it seems embraces one approach and is turned off by the other approach, so they are kind of mutually exclusive. I don't think I've ever read any male-focused erotica - if I want porn, I'm going to watch it, not read it - but I have read female-focused erotica because I find it hilarious. The advantage of the written word is that you can focus on the thoughts and emotional aspects of the situation, whereas the advantage of pictures/movies is that you can focus on the physical, so it's no surprise why consumer behavior for genders is as it is. Still, I'd say that if you go heavy on the sex and light on schmaltzy feelings you'll get your male audience. If you go heavy on the emotions and how special the guy makes the girl feel, you'll get your female audience. Find a way to do both without going overboard one way or the other and maybe you'll find male and females want to read your stuff. Exactly, men don't read erotica because they are more visual.. they really do just want to see it. Writing Male erotica would be one of the most pointless exercises I can imagine. 8 hours ago, Humble AK said: As done in romance novels I do. They're not realistic, that's the point. Just as the sex in the male-focused porn is not remotely realistic, and I know many females who find that hilarious - in fact, it's often made fun of. The romance in romance novels is not realistic it's all idealized and silly. It's funny to read stuff like: “When the day shall come that we do part," he said softly, and turned to look at me, "if my last words are not 'I love you'-ye'll ken it was because I didna have time.” because no one says these things. It's pretty much the analog to "play with her ass". It's just really funny. Again you're right, its pure fantasy. In the same way that most rom coms are fantasy and not in anyway an indication of how real life relationships work or exist. Having a man talk like that is akin to Dragons and Dwarves.. neither exist in the real world, but its fun to read about for some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humble AK Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 15 hours ago, JCRB's Honeypot said: Haha, well anyway, good luck with your writing if you don't understand the audience you are writing for. You can be obdurately insistent that people must behave one way when all you have to do is take a look at any consumer report for evidence that they behave another way. But success will be hard won if you go "No, no - this is what you're supposed to like, so I command you to like it!" And you'll just continue to be like this at the response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 Parsing your argument, figuring out what the points you are making beyond the reiterated, "men like different stuff, this series is porn and romance and you girls won't admit that it's porn or even erotica, or that it's the equivalent of Got for girls, but got is realistically historical and Outlander is not." Are you saying that Outlander is both bad and unpopular and it doesn't appeal to the men? But I wouldn't swear that's what you are saying. The Outlander series as both print version and televised version is popular and successful, with women predominantly in the print version, but at least as far as the television version is concerned, there are men who watch it -- just like some women watch got. So? What is the point being made? It's all so confusing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonCon's Red Beard Posted April 23, 2016 Share Posted April 23, 2016 4 hours ago, Zorral said: Parsing your argument, figuring out what the points you are making beyond the reiterated, "men like different stuff, this series is porn and romance and you girls won't admit that it's porn or even erotica, or that it's the equivalent of Got for girls, but got is realistically historical and Outlander is not." Are you saying that Outlander is both bad and unpopular and it doesn't appeal to the men? But I wouldn't swear that's what you are saying. The Outlander series as both print version and televised version is popular and successful, with women predominantly in the print version, but at least as far as the television version is concerned, there are men who watch it -- just like some women watch got. So? What is the point being made? It's all so confusing! If the Outlander books are more popular with women is because the books are thought to be romance and many men don't feel attracted to them at first sight. But those who have read them, have enjoyed them. I have a lot of male friends who enjoy romcons, they just don't like the generic ones that are immediately marketed for women and are massively consumed by them/us despite they're awful. But at the same time, many women enjoy action movies marketed for men, but won't waste their time or money with minor action movies that men would occasionally enjoy just because they're action. Now, Outlander's tagline for S1 was "Drop the Kilts". If I were a straight dude I'd say "ok, this is about a naked Scot guys. I pass". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mladen Posted April 23, 2016 Share Posted April 23, 2016 3 hours ago, JCRB's Honeypot said: Now, Outlander's tagline for S1 was "Drop the Kilts". If I were a straight dude I'd say "ok, this is about a naked Scot guys. I pass". Well, there are some of us who managed to go through entire first season 8 hours ago, Zorral said: The Outlander series as both print version and televised version is popular and successful, with women predominantly in the print version, but at least as far as the television version is concerned, there are men who watch it -- just like some women watch got. So? What is the point being made? It's all so confusing! Not even some. 42% of GoT viewership are women, and the social activity around the show counts for 50/50. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonCon's Red Beard Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 Ok, as I said, I am not yet watching Outlander until GoT is over, but I'm watching some scenes. I honestly laughed at the young lady telling Claire, "Your hubs is so cool he doesn't disturb you by doing the ugly thing men do!" (sex), specially because I saw it in a tumblr that mixed up with scenes of C/J having sex. I'm loving Outlander's sense of humour On 23/4/2016 at 1:13 AM, Risto said: Well, there are some of us who managed to go through entire first season Yeah, to each their own. I did enjoy some GOT breasts, but I'm not enjoying Cait's that much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Bauer 24 Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 Sing me a song of a series that was way loyal to the book in the respect of showing every painful detail of graphic rape, and then scrapped its canon ending! Ugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astromech Posted April 30, 2016 Share Posted April 30, 2016 So does Jamie hate or love Jack Randall? I couldn't tell which from that episode. I enjoy Claire's visits to Maitre Raymond, but her encyclopedic knowledge of herbs is a bit tiring. However, her learning new things about medicine from the 18th C. doctors is a nice touch. The court politics aren't as intriguing as I had hoped they would be. Everything seems a bit too obvious to the viewer. The most interesting part of this latest episode was what happens to Hawkins. The strength of the series remains the cinematography and design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Bauer 24 Posted May 1, 2016 Share Posted May 1, 2016 Just read a review for tonights episode and the first comment was "Another terrible rape scene. An Outlander trademark." Yeah, this show has a rape problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astromech Posted May 1, 2016 Share Posted May 1, 2016 Yeah, perhaps I should rephrase what I wrote about Hawkins. The most interesting plot twist this latest episode was Hawkins rape and what it means for Frank. Or was that Blackjack and Frank is fine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farerb Posted May 1, 2016 Share Posted May 1, 2016 It bothers me that every French they have encountered is a French stereotype caricature and not an actual person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.