fresiaa

I did not notice, but I heard a reviewer say his manners are much alike Black Jack Randall. @Atlanta "but Leghair will still be an immature girl (not a woman) even when she's 50. " I love Joanie. She is a pre-version of what she will be in the book: wise, goodhearted, and a mother to her mother. She ain't afraid of Scary Lairy. Some children are just insightfull and mature from birth, (like my youngest daughter, such a sweetie). I'm starting to wonder if at some point they will include Joanies story (novella). So I thought it was totally in character for Little Joanie to take her stepsister to Lallybroch.

Well, I don't think she is much of an actrice. Main problem is not that she is not tall, grumpy, pigheaded and scary with blazing red hair, it is that she is "cute" and "dainty". Bleh. But she rocks that fur though.

I concluded that Frank took Claire to THAT destination in Scotland because he wanted to check up on Little Roger, and the "history thing" was initially a ruse to get close to the reverend and see if the boy was all right. As Frank felt responsible for Jerry's death, and - maybe through his spy job during the war - kept an eye on Roger and his mother.

I never liked book Brianna, and I don't like TV Brianna either. But, hey, there are lots of perfectly fine people in real life that I don't like. It feels very natural, real life, to me that a main character is not saint or villain for a change.

I think they made Lizzy older because she'll be courting next season (maybe get married a year later). For viewers that is just 2 years. Just like Lady Isobel had to go from mid teen to married in the same episode. Add to that they are pretty much changing any age to "palatable for viewing" . Like they changed Ian from 14 to 16 and exchanged the prostitute for a barmaid. Lady Geneva looked 22 and not 17 as in the book, and she had sex on screen. And Fergus looks young and Marsali looks older, so you don't see the 16 year age difference.

It will get a bit awkward if Murtagh wants to know every little bit about the coming Revolution to steer the course of the movement. I don't think I would like that kind of time loopy thing. In the book Jamie uses the information to stay out of trouble, and lets it happen. Murtagh would not I am guessing, considering his Dougal spirited speech. Before you know it he is galloping off to Boston, Philadelphia, Benedict Arnold, etcetera. I had rather not.... rather let history be the back drop, and not try to timey wimey change it. As for the wicked witch, I thought for a moment it is Malva, but of course Malva is a child with a silly dream that didn't think things through on how things would work out. Maybe this is the new older more cunning tv version. Maybe the producers are going for a second Geillis character. (hope not) Nice to see the sow. And I so wanted to hear Clarence balk at Jamies arrival

Sorry to nit pick, it really is a great show! It does my head in - WHY did they have Fiona have that newspaper clipping for many years AND knowing all along they were looking for one James Fraser? It makes her an ultimate betch, to not give it to Clair in 1968. Another "doesn't make sense". They could have just easily put the clipping in the writers letter. The house looks way too small. Is it supposed to be the cabin? I don't remember a shelter before that. The hearth stone was for the Big House, right? I didn't see any thing of the bear, its damage to Meyers or the fight. I don't have a fancy expensive TV. I just see black. In most shows I shout "open the curtains" or "switch on the light". Here I was shouting a la Claire "bring more candles". Just saying.... I can't see dark scenes, so they might have just taped the audio as far as I'm concerned. No need for make up or CGI

Maybe it shows my age, but I didn't object to Rogers logic. It takes a while to understand each other. To understand yourself too. You won't believe what stupidity comes out of my mouth. Did anyone notice the intro showing a women with pearl on her wrist? Must be Brianna. Would Otter tooth wear a cotton shirt in 1710? Have I ever in my real life seen a man with bangs? Why leave after just two days (not in the book)? If they didn't want to ask for anything, why did they make the journey from Georgia to River Run in the first place? Can you really take a cart into unspoiled mountains? That finishing shot of Frasers Ridge looked so fake to me. Is it real? Wouldn't there be a stand on the festival about local history/family trees? Nobody bothers to ask about local Frasers? Will the festival drawing return as Jamie's "oops" moment? Too many questions are bugging me. Is it me or is it the show?

Something like that. If I remember correctly from the book, the overseer "disappears" overnight - said in vague terms that hinted he's killed for his multiple misdeeds. My speculation, on Jocasta's order and conveniently giving Jamie more room to be "needed at the job".

After the first "it is not like the book moaning" I really, really like the episode. I fully agree with Petunia846 that it is good the story is updated to more 2018 stronger emotional objections. It would be more historically correct to apply sixties sentiments, but it wouldn't connect with todays audience. Still.... I very much wanted to see the books skunk scene. I like slapstick. edit to add True to the book, because River Run is the wealthiest estate around for a (storyline) reason.

The scene with the pigs head was really upsetting me. It showed the practical side of pulling teeth. A dentist has the cooperation of the patient: the patient pulls back, by keeping his head firmly in place. So it is a combined force of pulling by the dentist and by the patient. Here however, it was clearly shown the cop couldn't get a firm grip, and I started to imagine what "a firm grip" would be - holding the nose, put thumb in mouth to hold upper jaw, put hand flat on bottom jaw - just too gross …… And even more revolting to imagining it to be the girls face. It brought home to me, being cold about it after watching millions of tv shows, that murder is awful. Brings me to RH (RedHerring or RealHint) what motive does the murderer have to pull teeth?

The Magistrate is a sweet man. and I really want Amelia to marry him, but I am disappointed Amelia doesn't do it from her own choice and soul searching. She was portrayed as strong and independent so far, making her own moral rules and applying diplomacy, but now she buckles under the first bit of pressure? Nah, it doesn't fit. It feels like very bad writing to me. At least she should have had a night long prayer about it, or something. So, what a hair brained scheme was that? With the magistrate and Fanny's policeman plus some more muscleman, a raid on a whorehouse would be enough to save the girl, and make kidnap stick. How would they explain to the magistrate "this girl was kidnapped", girl "eh, no, I was hired as a housemaid. If anyone kidnapped me it was the black dude in golden spandex". I get that the house is protected by what-s-his-name-client, but not that much. It would be better to involve the magistrate than, ehm, what? lowering the girl out of the window against her will?

Because because because.... I didn't want to write this 2 weeks ago, because it is such a trope... It can all be explained (Such a cheap ploy) with the explanation she married the crown prince when he was an energetic wild teenager, they eloped and therefor had a legal child. Having a mistress is okay, bigamy not, not even for the king, who is head of church. And for a crown prince to marry without consent of the king and parliament is treason. Wasn't there a young princess in England that was executed with her husband when they secretly married? I will have to google that. Edit: I had Elizabeth I and Jane Grey mashed up here, the first questioned on sexual relation and her co-accused executed, the other second and her teenage husband executed for taking the throne. That is also why Lady Fitz can't marry someone else, neither on conscience, religion or legal grounds (bigamy). Also she would want to remain faithful to the first marriage in order to be able to plead "virtue and innocence" in case it comes out (avoid the Tower on treason), and strengthen the case for the child as heir. Lady Fitz said "I will be dead when it comes out". She is "lucky" because 1) a prince chose her, and 2) now as king will do anything to keep the secret. A privilege to be used sparingly and with tact, of course. Anyway, I don't think they will keep it a secret for us very long. My interpret of the brooding looks from Lady Fitz to Charlotte is lesbian desire. On another note, I missed this info from the show: Was the Marquess part of the killing group in the first season? Is he part of it now?

I'm with Margaret here. He went of to rescue Harriet's children while the client of Margaret's children lay dying. He went to save Harriet's children, when those who call him "Pa" were in danger of being hanged. I think that is pretty indicative of where his loyalty lies.

Mrs Scanwell: Better than roast pheasant from the devils table. Margaret: What about a bit of stew from mine? Mrs Scanwell: I am sure it can be purified through prayer