Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Lion

Member
  • Posts

    245
  • Joined

Everything posted by Lion

  1. A need for hydration isn't really comparable to something like consuming tobacco. Even though many or all of the beverages Claire is consuming has a fermented component, it's still providing hydration, which all humans need to survive. Not to mention, Jamie and Claire are operating a liquor business. As far as tobacco, I would have thought snuff was the popular tobacco product of the time, especially in France. I wouldn't expect to see a lot of smoking in those settings. We do get some smoking in backgrounds and comments about tobacco smells, but still, snuff should be the go-to product.
  2. This seems to be a frequently asked question all around this forum so I figured I'd chime in here at least. The scientific link between alcohol and birth defects is fairly new. There have been casual connections made throughout history, most of which were viewed as more moral or hereditary issues. It wasn't until 1973 the the first scientific study linking alcohol with fetal defects was published and even then, it took more than a decade for it to really start trickling down to practicing doctors such that they would 'suggest' their patients merely lower their alcohol consumption rather than stop altogether. ffs, during the 70's and 80's, doctors were actually using alcohol in IVs to help stop preterm labor. Even when it became widely accepted that alcohol and fetuses don't mix, there was still a lot of disagreement about exactly how much alcohol a pregnant woman could drink before it became harmful. It wasn't until this year that the CDC and other groups came out with a very definitive 'no' on drinking even small amounts of alcohol when pregnant and even went so far as to recommend women not drink at all if they are sexually active and not on birth control. Long story short, a 1940's woman really would have had no reason to think she was actively harming the fetus while consuming alcohol. And as has been mentioned, the sanitation and sewage concerns of mid 18th century Paris would present its own problems. However, a WWII nurse, especially one who had lived all over the world as a child, should be quite knowledgeable about many different water purification techniques. Though, considering iodine hadn't yet been discovered, bleach hadn't been invented, the methods are limited and more physically intensive. Though, since Claire wouldn't have known what we know about alcohol and fetuses, she'd really have had no reason to concern herself with it. Alcohol was probably in everything, including added to boiling water used to make tea, even if only to mask the nasty smell of the Parisian water.
  3. YES! I had a head-desk moment reading through the headlines this morning and seeing that journalists totally missed the point. My spouse and I are both frequently involved in having studies published. We are in very different fields, one science, one social science. But we still experience the same annoyance and fury of having the media latch on to a study, completely misread it and then misinform their audience about what it means. I've wondered whether it's a deliberate attempt to devalue science so the looneys can try to better sell their creationism, climate-warming-is-a-myth bullshit. I think it would be a great comedic exercise to read or listen to these news items, and then source the study they cited so as to see what terribly awful reading skills they have. My spouse, children and I enjoy this as a dinner table activity.
  4. Thankfully they cast an older child who can easily move between various ages up to and through the teens. Too many shows often start with actors way too young and forget that kids grow up, and they do so quickly. So we'll have an 8 year old Carl Grimes and then two years later show time, he'll be 17 and you just have to pretend that he was 15 at the start. But here, they smartly started with a teenager who can easily pass for young but can also easily be made to seem as an older teen.
  5. But why would Vincent know the technicalities of what and why Marcel did what he did nearly a century ago? Marcel emerged the victor and then was a leader of the supernatural world in New Orleans. As such, he writes the history. That's how Vincent knows Marcel - the dude who kicked the Mikaelson's out of New Orleans because that's the public image, regardless of how things occurred in private.
  6. Women still live in fear. Men still get away with it. I appreciate the sexual violence in the series and on the show. It's not that I like watching it or that I get off on it. It's that it's honest. It may be the ugly part of life, but it's still a part of life. It's not treated as an afterthought or something to include because it's shocking. We see the results and consequences of all of this violence and trauma, everything from sexual violence to domestic violence to institutionalized violence. None of the writers involved shy away from showing us how horribly damaged people can be by all of this. It's as real as the everyday work of tossing pee on wool to set the dye or the dangerous job of boar hunting. I cringe, but it's good they leave in the drinking as a 1940's woman wouldn't have necessarily abstained. Diagnosing and understanding fetal alcohol syndrome is still a ways off.
  7. Nothing like returning home from such a lovely vacation, feeling perfectly high on life, and then being greeted with an episode of Outlander that just punches you in the gut. Black Jack Randall simply sucked all of the air out of the room. I was on edge despite knowing exactly what would and will happen. This is the point in the series where it's hard not to dislike Claire. Everything from destroying the life and prospects of two perfectly wonderful people (Mary and Alex) to making Jamie not deal with Randall in case of Frank. As Jamie pointed out, they were there to change history, and that change is going to mean probable change across the board. He has trusted her to know how this works, and it's abundantly neither of them, but especially Claire, have really thought about what changing things would mean. Would Claire have been in Scotland anyway if the Scots won and the Stuarts were returned to the throne? It changes how history is written and there may not have even been surviving documents about Frank's ancestor who was an asshole up in Scotland. Or Frank's ancestor would be treated as some more shameful branch of the family, like how people descended from slavers or Nazis feel- it might be perfectly interesting but one would be a whole lot less like to make a honeymoon out of it. The problem is that Claire doesn't know how this timey whimey thing works. She doesn't know if the past can be changed. There is no real way to test it, at least that she knows of. At this point in the story, the audience is now aware that Claire and Jamie's time in Paris has merely served to do the exact opposite of what they've intended. They've literally put all of the movers, shakers and money makers together. Loved King Louis. I loved that they had so many reasons for him to be throwing shade at BJR. It could be because he noticed Claire was not amused with him. Or because Lord Parritch was clearly giving BJR the evil eye. Or because Louis wanted to mock the British army a bit right before he maybe funds the rebellion. Or a gazillion other reasons. It was just so perfect.
  8. Marcel and Rebekah did it together. At least, they conceived of it together. So, Vincent saying this isn't some sort of revisionist history. This show has a serious woman problem. Either the writers are from the Supernatural staff and they despise women, or there is something going on on set that makes the women want to leave. Haley is the only woman left from the pilot (and she's died at least once and has forced to be a werewolf for months on end), and her story just revolves around the men in her life. It's all pretty gross.
  9. Didn't they establish last episode that the magical barrier in the bar was breaking down?
  10. Another week goes by with no word about renewal and this theory on waiting is starting to look even more enticing. On the one hand, it seems unlikely that a premium network would play these games, but on the other hand it would be quite delicious if they did. Outlander is doing well in the ratings, I think it's their top show ratings wise. They have received widespread critical acclaim. It's possible behind-the-scenes negotiations and such are still going on, but we're nearing the halfway mark and one has to think that not announcing now indicates games are afoot. I'm starting to route for your fakeout theory!
  11. Sure, Ron Moore can change things. But making adjustments to the adaptation is not the same as saying the Comte's story shouldn't be used because it's somehow so different from the other many time travelers. It's incredibly unlikely that you never gave the Comte another thought considering he's mentioned multiple times throughout the series. There's a pretty large plot about his lineage in Echo, as just one example.
  12. Mary almost certainly would have married that old dude if she hadn't been raped. She and Alex declaring love to one another would have been unlikely to change that because neither were much likely to go so against societal expectations and run away together, at least not as things were then. How Mary is treated by society after her rape really opens the door to her and Alex having a physical relationship.
  13. I'm not sure how one can claim that St. Germain's story (which has been included across several books, btw) is somehow not 'grounded in reality' while Claire's is. Not to mention we meet MANY characters who are time travelers and who have varying levels of skills. We're talking everything from Raymond's strange healing of Claire after the stillbirth and his seeing auras to odd occurrences when travelers hold gemstones to heightened senses to Jem's and Mandy's telepathic connection and much more. We see Claire's mystical-seeming abilities growing as the series goes on (she's starting to see the blue lights and feeling the internal workings of a body, for example). Even if someone somehow missed every hint that should have caused them to wonder what more there was to the Comte, it's completely baffling to suggest that including him as yet another time traveler is somehow so removed from the rest of the sci-fi/fantasy/magic/whatever so as to be 'not grounded in reality' despite the fact that the Comte is a single character in a series overflowing with those just like him.
  14. More about the Comte. My partner pointed out to me that the he looked concerned when Claire threatened him with poison after the talk about her necklace. It strikes me that from his view, the Frasers can be seen to almost be gunning specifically for him. All of the things we've seen him actually do in retaliation has been to try to embarrass them (and he appears to take such joy in it as that's when he gets his best smiles), like when disrupting the chess game or ensuring the 'police' were called which will certainly create a minor scandal. We can speculate that he tried to poison her but it's not something that has been confirmed. Now that he's leaving with BPC, knowing that he will be be a BPC financier, that at this time he's having an affair with Geillis (assuming they keep to the books) and that he's colluding with the Duke who has surely had some harsh words to say about Claire, things definitely have different optics when viewed from the Comte's eyes. The Fraser's have been complicit in destroying his property (yes, I know he intended in being complicit in causing a smallpox outbreak) and now Claire has openly threatened him. The Comte and his wife were giving one another such long meaningful looks. It's hard to really determine if it's because they intend(ed?) to do something against Claire or that they were worried what Claire would do to them.
  15. I pretty sure we all know the technical relationship between Joan and Jamie. But thanks for clearing that up for everyone who may have somehow been super confused about Joan having a different last name than her Da (in case you forgot, Joan considers Jamie her dad, Jamie considers Joan and her sisters his daughters). Except the Comte and Raymond have been sort of 'ghosts' in multiple books. They have served to move and shake several fairly major plots despite being completely off screen. Even if one missed all the massive neon blinking signs in DiA that point to the Comte having something extra special about him, and the curious bit about him having some random interest in financing BPC, it's impossible to believe that one could go on to miss every single other hint or explicit mention of Raymond and the Comte the other books, the ones that came out before TSB. So, I mean, you're welcome to your theory but it doesn't actually make any sense.
  16. I don't remember all the specifics, has been years since I read it. Michael Murray is heading back to France after Ian's funeral and he's escorting Joan MacKimmie, Jamie's daughter, as she'll be joining the convent. The Comte, real name Paul Rakoczy, is in Paris at this time as he's hear Raymond has returned. The Comte's gifts are explored, he can see or feel biology, or something of that nature. Joan has a special gift, she can see things and she hears voices, usually to warn of impending doom. Due to a mix up, the Comte hears of Joan and think she's Claire's daughter so he kidnaps her and takes her to his personal stone-traveling basement. He's basically trying to figure out how to go waaaay forward in time to see if that slows down aging. Raymond shows up looking younger, reveals to him they are all related, then he and the Comte simply disappear. I don't recall specifics about when he originally came but he's traveled to several different times and can direct himself much better than Claire. He also verifies that he is the one Geillis spoke of when she said she'd met another in France. She was Melisande, I think they had a child together and while he's trying to impregnate another woman (a special obsession of his, you'll recall Fergus' potential parentage), he briefly wonders if he might be having sex with his own daughter.
  17. Well this is a book thread so one would assume that everyone posting here has, um, read the books. Or at least is willing to be spoiled. Whether or not you think Diana did not originally intend him to survive and be a time traveler doesn't mean much when that's clearly what happened to him. As far as any hints about the Comte being...different...well, obviously there are plenty! Not only do people gossip about him being involved in sorcery and such, but he's lumped in together all the time with the two known time travelers, Raymond and Claire.
  18. To clarify, I don't consider the "Manage Content" feature to be at all useful in actually following shows. I used to be able to go straight to My Show page and know which forum had been updated and even see the most recently updated thread in that forum, straight from the My Show page. Now it's just a list, which is stupid. The note at the top of the forum says the David Whoever bot knows about the problem and suggests that it will be fixed or improved. We'll see. Well the Duke isn't supposed to be sympathetic to Catholics or the Stuart royal family, so his behavior seemed perfectly legitimate and justified. He was acted as any high ranking noble Englishman would in that environment. BPC was being his usual fuck up by getting pissy, and I assume Louise recognized that the Duke couldn't sit at the table and feign agreement or camaraderie with the Stuart prince. It seeme to me like she was genuinely trying to help Charles because she understands the politics of the game while he clearly doesn't. Because it's a non-lethal weapon that was better than what he had. That heavy tassel at the end served it's purpose quite well. Another plus is that the rope can be used to tie people up to help them calm down. I think most of the shots of her going up the stairs are done from behind without even showing the side of her face, so I assume it's probably a stand in quite a bit of the time.
  19. The Comte is shown watching Claire with a special look when she enters the dinner party after her attack so I'm not so sure that his special look when she was wheezing from bitter cascara can be confirmation he was involved. As to the bolded, we know that what really happened in the chamber isn't what Claire thinks happened in the chamber. We know Raymond very deliberately didn't kill him and really only stepped in to offer the dragon's blood when the Comte started to turn the tide against Claire. It seemed a small mercy to quickly clear up the 'trial' with the trick as it got all of them out of the room alive, even if it meant the Comte had to go to another time for a while. This is why I'm so curious about whether or not they'll bring in the Comte's full story as part of this because it changes things a bit, at least how certain acts are perceived. I assume Raymond is telling the truth that he didn't sell the Comte the cascara and that he'd only sold it to one person in the last months. We know the Comte does his own visits at Raymond's, though that doesn't preclude him having sent someone sometime in the last few months to procure the cascara. The Comte seems to take great pleasure in Claire's discomfort (his stare down of her at Raymond's shop followed by a smirk is a great illustration of this), though that doesn't necessarily mean he tried to poison her. He definitely could have. I don't know. Dammit, I just really need/want to know if the Comte time traveling/metaphysical body magic thing will be introduced.
  20. Yeah, The Space Between. I think it's one of the best books in the series, tbh.
  21. This was really enjoyable. I've been in the minority in that I wholeheartedly approved of Claire and Jamie experiencing the distance between them. I didn't have any special feelings about the abbey cave scene so it's not something I missed. The way they portrayed their relationship post rape has not only been very realistic, but it's a great improvement in the adaptation. It's made their reconnection much more meaningful, and also joyful to watch. I can't remember in the book who did the poisoning and who set up the attack. I vaguely recall that the Duke was involved in at least one of those plots, but can't be certain. (and thanks to anyone who can remind me of these things). I've been so curious if the show will get into the Comte being a fellow time traveler and a relation to Raymond (and by extension, Claire) so I might be reading more into it than is really there. I'm starting to see these scenes between the Comte and Claire as way less sinister than perhaps they really are. I almost feel like they have to touch on it because there won't really be another chance to do it in the future considering his survival and ultimate reveal as a time traveler happens in a side story well outside of Jamie and Claire's story. So when he's watching Claire with such intensity, is it because he's planning something sinister, is it because he just really hates her, or is it because he realizes she's just like him (of course it could also be all of the above). I thought Fergus' was both parts adorable and concerning. Adorable because the actor is just so perfect for the role. Concerning because (1) the inappropriate eating is often a problem orphans experience due to neglect, abuse, periods of hunger and other traumas so it's really sad to see it (though I'm not even sure anyone involved with the production has any concept of childhood traumas, which is annoying) and (2) it doesn't jive with how we know he acts after the attack on Claire and Mary. I thought I recalled him being very upset about it, and the way his table eating is filmed makes it seem like he's not yet so attached to Jamie, which is too bad. Their relationship is such a special one. The new forum is terrible. I can barely read anything, I can no longer follow my shows, and a dozen other problems. I hope they'll be fixing their fuck up quite soon.
  22. I really hope those extras are blacklisted. What terrible horrible pieces of shit. This show really couldn't afford to lose more women. I'm sure Davina will continue to be part of the show, at least for a while. But simply having 'killed' her, even if she comes back is rather annoying. I'm tired of death not meaning anything on these shows. It seems like all of the CW shows have completely lost their entertainment value simultaneously this year.
  23. Sigh. It's not about getting 'wound up about fictional violence' or being 'bothered' to watch, but about gratuitous violence. You'll notice that you haven't seen anyone remarking on Indra's violence against Pike. That was earned, it fit with what we know of the characters, and it served the story. Kane's crucifixion was gratuitous. The story had already determined that threatening the lives of chipped individuals was the fastest route to getting someone to swallow the chip. This prolonged torture served no purpose considering the known method is the one that worked in the end. The torture served no purpose in the story other than to just toss in their beloved and disgusting religious imagery. In this way, it was bothersome. At least to viewers who care about how stories are told. Some obviously don't.
  24. Didn't the kids on the dropship initially treat Octavia as though it was the first time they had seen her up close? Talk about completely gratuitous violence with that crucifixion. ALIE already knew there was no reason for it to be done considering the great success she experienced after getting Abby to drink the koolaid swallow the chip. The only reason for the script to not immediately go the route of threatening Abby's life is because they wanted to include some completely unnecessary violence. Guess they thought it was edgy. Instead, it's only stupid.
  25. Oh my poor sweet Murtagh. "A man doesna concern himself with the affairs of women." Guess we know why Ellen MacKenzie wasn't won over by those boars husks bracelet things.
×
×
  • Create New...