Jump to content

Outlander (Tv show)


AncalagonTheBlack

Recommended Posts

At what point does Claire get to violate the Prime Directive, and break out a machine gun, or throw a grenade? I'm sorry, but I'd be breaking all the rules.



Seriously though, WW2 was credited for putting women on the path of self reliance, and paved the way for working outside the home. A woman of Claires time may have had an easier time of adapting to that period, but I think a woman of today, (and even a man), could not.


Our external environment is so much a part of who we are, and as much as I like to sleep to crickets, a week in historic Williamsburg where "they keep it real" was enough to make me realize that silence is deafening.


While I don't like to be on call 24/7, or take a conference call while I'm at the beach, the technology of staying connected has made that possible, and to some degree impossible to be without, (and dating myself, I do remember when there were only 13 channels and if the President was on, you could cancel "Wonder Woman-" something I never forgave him for).



A horse named Bud cured me of ever wanting to own one as he kept riding me into the bushes to eat grass. His Trainer said, "Mam, you have to control him, not the other way around!"



And vice versa, my friend also pointed out that if anyone from that time came into ours, they simply would not be able to simply jump into a car and ride without becoming car sick, (cough), "Sleepy Hollow," (cough).




But yes, I could see that bad Frank might be a deterrent to any current relationship with good Frank.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am the opposite, I think Jamie is developed just fine, but like I said, it's interesting.Not sure if you all have seen this, the podcast:https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/outlander-official-podcast/id910631883The showrunner goes through the whole episode and talks through it, including book and show changes, you can watch while they are talking. (Would have been nice for Game of Thrones...)

Thanks for that. I used to enjoy his Battlestar Galactica podcasts almost as much as the show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the part I bolded, it did come off like that and I think it undercut the credibility of that scene. In fact, my husband is convinced that Claire imagined that whole thing in her head since she was staring at the window just as Jaime broke it open and of course he would kill Jack without hesitation in that situation if it really happened. Having not read the books, I am curious as to whether this was close to how it was written or if this was a departure.

From the moment she's taken from the stones by English soldiers to the moment Jamie shows up is almost identical to how it is in the books, save for a few changes in dialogue. There's a reason Jamie doesn't immediately shoot Jack.

I think that the events happened as Claire was gearing up to set roots with Frank, it was an in between period which has now been disrupted with her time with Jamie.

I think that other than Frank and her modern comforts there is very little keeping Claire in the modern world. I don't think she was even planning on having a career. If I'm not mistaken wasn't she trying to get pregnant? She was probably gearing up to settle as a homemaker while her husband was a professor at Oxford. Not a very exciting life for a former army nurse.

Then this happens and now she has to choose between a life of relative comfort knowing exactly what going to happen in her time, to a life of adventure and something new, something real. Having said that I think at this moment she'd choose Frank because she knows him, she knows she'll be relatively safe with him. However, I think given time (which is what the capture was all about) her relationship with Jamie and his family will deepen because she's beginning to lay roots with them.

I think this sums it up quite well. I'm not sure it come across well in the show, but Claire definitely feels a connection with Ned Gowan, something that is somewhat affirmed during the horse-jacking. He's a man that left his own city comforts behind to live a life of adventure. It was portrayed better in the books because there was a lot of breathing room between all the crap that happened in this episode. The raid was this really fun thing because it was this typical Scottish past time, where she was involved as a healer after the fact. I'll go ahead and spoiler the rest of this just in case, though I'm only making vague comments about future stuff, but I'm going in a bit more with comparing books and show.

There has been less focus on Claire's skills as a healer in the last few episodes. Her calling as a healer is super important to her and being able to make a true difference in the ills of people around her by using knowledge of the 20th century is what really stands as a major foundation for being drawn to remain in that time. The adventure is still definitely part of it, but not all. Being her own person apart from her husband is a pretty big thing.

I'm still not sure how I feel about this, but in the books Jamie and Claire know one another a lot better. They've had several conversations, some brief, some long, but all more meaningful than a "tell me about your family" talk would be. This was all before they had sex, most before the issue of marriage even came up. Then they had a three day honeymoon where there was some can't-keep-their-hands-off-each other stuff, but in between it all, they were still talking. Claire and Jamie in the show barely have a foundation for their relationship. If they continue to be nearly faithful to the events in the books, this lack of foundation might turn out problematic.

However, in this post and another one you wrote, you've made me wonder if the show intentionally left their relationship a bit rootless in order to focus more on Claire building roots outside of just her man. As you noted, it's a major difference between Claire's life with Frank and her life in the 18th century. Frank and Claire's second honeymoon was very Frank-centric. And Claire was bored. She'd appear distracted while Frank was excitedly telling her about this and that and how it related to his own past. She'd wonder away to have her palm read or excuse herself from sitting in on another history lesson to go check out some flowers. I think she truly loves Frank, but he's also the only thing that she had a true connection with post war. The way she was portrayed at the start of the war and post war is also intriguing. Shiny eyed and excited getting on the train (and this was soon after she married), then looking nearly defeated when everyone else is drinking champaign and celebrating victory.

In this other time, despite the dangers, she has that shiny eyed excited look again. She's connecting with these people, not just with Jamie. There's also the fact that there has been no mention that she'd have to give up her healing now that she's married. Jamie even says something about telling Dougal that they were going off so Claire can collect more herbs. She has a larger pedestal on which to place her vase in this time, with these people.

I haven't read the books, but I wonder if a major obstacle to a lasting Claire-Frank reunion will be the fact that her once beloved husband so closely resembles a BJR.

Two sexual assaults within in minutes of each other was a bit much. Am I alone in the impression that Claire was resentful towards Jamie because he didn't sacrifice himself to stop the rape, and instead, she was forced to commit murder?

I think the show has done a good job of portraying some of the obstacles Claire would have if she returned to Frank and BJR is definitely one of them.

Yeah, the pacing for this episode was way off as those sexual assaults in the same day was ridiculous. Claire's going to have the shittiest day. I don't think Claire was resentful in a "you failed at being my knight in shining armor" sort of way. More that she was shocked and angry and needing to lash out and blame. That's not to say I don't think there is no resentment there but that it's more that she's just angry that this happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the moment she's taken from the stones by English soldiers to the moment Jamie shows up is almost identical to how it is in the books, save for a few changes in dialogue. There's a reason Jamie doesn't immediately shoot Jack.

Thanks for the explanation. Hmm, now I am really curious as to what the reason is. I guess I only have to wait 7 months to find out! (ETA I decided I don't want to read the books until everything is over).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really liked this episode. Sure, the sexual assault storyline is pretty lazy, but I think it was handled rather well. At least better than some other shows I could think off.

I'll start with one brilliant little detail I'd like to report on (I see no one mentioned it yet). I really wish more shows/movies did such clever things. So, remember when Frank goes apeshit on those muggers? You may recall that he pulled out a little club to trash his two assailants. Guess what the American name for that type of cosh is?

...
...
...
...

A blackjack :D

I really have to give a shout-out to Menzies. I wasn't impressed by his Edmure, but the man can act. I sometimes forget that Frank and BJR are played by the same person. And it got even better this episode, when Frank cracked and all of a sudden we could see that he has more in common with good old BJR than we previously might have suspected.

Balfe was excellent as always. It's pretty strange that I had never heard of the actress before, she's very good. I liked how she went from bliss to horror in the blink of an eye with the two assault scenes. I also very much appreciated the writing the second time. She could have walked away, she made a good guess and it payed off. But she couldn't help and be a little smug about it, and that's what set BJR off again. Normally, hubris is reserved for the male anti-hero, I'm digging it to see a woman on TV suffering the same affliction.

Also a big fan of the cinematography this episode. Outlander looks gorgeous as always, but there was more to this episode than just being pretty. I like how the WWII portion had this drab colouring, while the 18the century Highlands looked as lush as ever.

Another thing I really liked were the fightscenes. The knifing was horrific in a quite poetic way. I liked that it was more about the effect on Claire than it was about showing a gory wound. The first fightscene was brilliant in anther way. There was so much glee in the way Claire clan companions handled that robbery. That look on Ned's face after he fired that shot was priceless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this sums it up quite well. I'm not sure it come across well in the show, but Claire definitely feels a connection with Ned Gowan, something that is somewhat affirmed during the horse-jacking. He's a man that left his own city comforts behind to live a life of adventure. It was portrayed better in the books because there was a lot of breathing room between all the crap that happened in this episode. The raid was this really fun thing because it was this typical Scottish past time, where she was involved as a healer after the fact. I'll go ahead and spoiler the rest of this just in case, though I'm only making vague comments about future stuff, but I'm going in a bit more with comparing books and show.

However, in this post and another one you wrote, you've made me wonder if the show intentionally left their relationship a bit rootless in order to focus more on Claire building roots outside of just her man. As you noted, it's a major difference between Claire's life with Frank and her life in the 18th century. Frank and Claire's second honeymoon was very Frank-centric. And Claire was bored. She'd appear distracted while Frank was excitedly telling her about this and that and how it related to his own past. She'd wonder away to have her palm read or excuse herself from sitting in on another history lesson to go check out some flowers. I think she truly loves Frank, but he's also the only thing that she had a true connection with post war. The way she was portrayed at the start of the war and post war is also intriguing. Shiny eyed and excited getting on the train (and this was soon after she married), then looking nearly defeated when everyone else is drinking champaign and celebrating victory.

In this other time, despite the dangers, she has that shiny eyed excited look again. She's connecting with these people, not just with Jamie. There's also the fact that there has been no mention that she'd have to give up her healing now that she's married. Jamie even says something about telling Dougal that they were going off so Claire can collect more herbs. She has a larger pedestal on which to place her vase in this time, with these people.

I think the show has done a good job of portraying some of the obstacles Claire would have if she returned to Frank and BJR is definitely one of them.

Well, the first thing we hear from Claire is about her never having owned a vase because she's never lived in a place long enough to lay down roots. They are telling us from the beginning that she doesn't really have much holding her in place, except for Frank. I think this was very much done on purpose they wanted to viewers to know she had very few tethers in her time.

Her first encounter with Jamie and his people is about how they are a family, they work together and look after each other, even when they are fighting with each other. She goes to live with his family becomes part of the community as a healer, etc. It's only been 8 weeks but it's enough time for her to see what things would be like if she had a family, a community around her.

Regarding Jamie, you're right they need to build that up more. However, I think that they've laid down a foundation, they just need to expand it. We have their connection healer and patient, but we also see that they like each other as people, Claire usually sits near Jamie at events while he explains everything that's happening. Or the time where Claire teases Jamie about the girl (can't remember her name) because she's a bit jealous (and admits it).

I really liked this episode. Sure, the sexual assault storyline is pretty lazy, but I think it was handled rather well. At least better than some other shows I could think off.

I'll start with one brilliant little detail I'd like to report on (I see no one mentioned it yet). I really wish more shows/movies did such clever things. So, remember when Frank goes apeshit on those muggers? You may recall that he pulled out a little club to trash his two assailants. Guess what the American name for that type of cosh is?

...

...

...

...

A blackjack :D

Haha! I didn't even notice that, great catch. Very wink, wink...;)

Also a big fan of the cinematography this episode. Outlander looks gorgeous as always, but there was more to this episode than just being pretty. I like how the WWII portion had this drab colouring, while the 18the century Highlands looked as lush as ever.

The cinematography has been spectacular, I mean, I've always wanted to visit Scotland but now I need to go to Scotland. :D

Not only is the "present time" drabby and gray, it's drabby, rainy and gray, while Scotland is lush, green and sunny.

Another thing I really liked were the fightscenes. The knifing was horrific in a quite poetic way. I liked that it was more about the effect on Claire than it was about showing a gory wound. The first fightscene was brilliant in anther way. There was so much glee in the way Claire clan companions handled that robbery. That look on Ned's face after he fired that shot was priceless.

That was a good scene, Ned was so proud of himself. it's like he was expecting high-fives after he shot the guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oooh, now I'm really curious about this question:

A Scotman never forgets?
Before Claire bolts for the stone circle, Jamie gives her an order: "You stay here. I'll be back, I promise ... Now you promise me you'll stay put. Promise you'll be here when I get back." Even though the final shot of the midseason finale suggests that he will rescue Claire from Black Jack Randall, Jamie is not the type to forget that a promise has been broken. Remember, the Highlanders suggested that Claire's "hide be tanned" for her rough language in episode one. And in episode two, a girl was ordered to be beaten in public because of "disobedience" — her father thought she was being promiscuous. (No proof required there.) And in episode three, a young boy was nailed to the pillory by his ear for stealing — and that was considered the more merciful sentence. "That was just a reality of the time," actress Caitriona Balfe told Vulture recently. So what do you think happens to women who disobey their husbands? "Careful," Geillis Duncan warned Claire in episode four. "Promises are a serious thing in this country."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am totally spoiled now, I couldn't resist. But the author said there will be Jamie voiceovers when the show returns.

WHAT!

I'm really excited about this. Where did you read about it?

Well answer to one question is obviously

That kid IS Dougals child and it was some sort of arrangement with his brother who can't have kids because of his condition...that's what I though it was the moment they mentioned it

That's what I thought to. Either that or that they'd had an affair and Collin just looked the other way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last thing I'm excited about is more fucking voice-overs. Especially by Jaime, I like the guy, but I have a hard time understanding him at times.

Oh dear god. Why? Why do they feel like voiceovers are necessary, I absolutely don't get it. I watched the entire series and I can't think of one voiceover that was necessary for me to get the plot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the first thing we hear from Claire is about her never having owned a vase because she's never lived in a place long enough to lay down roots. They are telling us from the beginning that she doesn't really have much holding her in place, except for Frank. I think this was very much done on purpose they wanted to viewers to know she had very few tethers in her time.

I forget about the vase. She didn't buy it even though she and Frank were heading to Oxford immediately after their honeymoon so that they could, presumably, begin the process of laying down roots. She turned away from the vase, away from the promises the future held.

Thanks for the explanation. Hmm, now I am really curious as to what the reason is. I guess I only have to wait 7 months to find out! (ETA I decided I don't want to read the books until everything is over).

No problem. I'd have to rewatch but you might be able to figure it in that last minute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...