SassAndSnacks
-
Posts
375 -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by SassAndSnacks
-
-
On 9/8/2021 at 6:47 PM, Anothermi said:
I wondered what kind of blacksmith has a smithy that can be turned into a romantic hideaway, but doesn't come to work or get drop-in repair requests! 🙄 And has a pile of clean blankets that turns the floor into a slightly raised bed!?! 🙄🙄
YESSSSSSSS!!!!! I'm willing to hand wave A LOT of things with this show, and I have to just to make it through sometimes, but this one...c'mon.
On 9/8/2021 at 6:47 PM, Anothermi said:Or it's a generational thing. Claire is independent but grew up with plenty of examples of women depending on men for protection while Brianna, in particular, is of a generation that didn't see that as necessary and she hadn't yet had any experience that would make her suspicious of what Bonnet was implying with his knowing looks (nod, nod, wink, wink). Like Claire did, she is having era adjustment problems—but Claire was lucky in that she was "captured" by men with some semblance of honourable conduct.
And the positioning of this event after her blowup with Roger smacks of implying she was getting her just desserts. Did. Not. Appreciate. This. At. All.
17 hours ago, Anothermi said:The fact that Claire wasn't ravished was the GOOD LUCK Claire had by looking and sounding like an upper class woman, the story she told about how she came to be there—indicating she HAD a man—and the willingness of Dougal to give her the benefit of the doubt (and his men respected his decision). Brianna didn't have any of those things going for her and was likely a great deal more naive than Claire was (due to her war experience and her unusual upbringing). Plus, although she was surrounded by a lot of men, all of them believed what happened to her was what she deserved. (Certainly nothing she should be protected from.)
Really appreciate your analysis in the two comments above. In reading it, it helped me fully understand by feelings for Brianna in this situation. I also think her youth played a part - young 20s, you're invincible, right. You can do anything. I did things in my 20s that I find to be so foolish now. Even though Claire was only slightly older than Bri when she first came through the stones, she had a lot more life experience and knew boundaries more (as much as Claire can know boundaries, that is).
-
3
-
-
On 9/4/2021 at 6:24 PM, Cdh20 said:
I love reading your predictions!
I second this!!
On 9/4/2021 at 4:56 PM, gingerella said:I was surprised at how fast Roger found Brianna. If only they'd gone back to the inn and gotten their own room for their wedding night, all would have been a lot better.
Hear hear!! YES! Them shacking up in a smithy in broad daylight and then into the night made zero sense. Was no one working? Was it Murtaugh's place and since he was out rebel-rousing he wasn't around to break up the love nest?
On 9/4/2021 at 4:56 PM, gingerella said:George AND Martha Washington having zero British accents.
I'd also like to add that George Washington should always be played by Ian Kahn from Turn. There should be an index somewhere that outlines which historical/literary figures can only be played by specific actors. This Washington is wrong, and I won't stand for it.
On 9/6/2021 at 10:21 PM, Scarlett45 said:A “healer” actually has a chance to get to talk to people and earn their trust, and can better serve them.
This is interesting. Were Healers more respected than surgeons at the time?
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, gingerella said:
Can I sit next to you on that bench? I have pastries...and no, they're no bannocks, they're the good shit!
Absolutely, yes. I've never met a carb I didn't like.
-
1
-
-
Confession - This is my least favorite episode of the entire Outlander canon. I never rewatch this one.
Disclaimer - My comments here are completely objective and most likely of the "unpopular opinion" type.
On 8/27/2021 at 6:38 PM, Anothermi said:Roger: Do you hear that?
Fiona: The stones dinna call to me.
Love that you caught on to this and that you framed it in the way you did.
On 8/27/2021 at 6:38 PM, Anothermi said:So the show decides NOW—4 seasons in— to show us that Frank could be a good, loving man?
I maintain that he isn't.
22 hours ago, gingerella said:Particularly, he reconfirmed his assholishness when he tried to convince Brianna that she should move to England with him, and leave Claire behind in Boston. That showed how deceptive he was, which I already knew but seeing it from this perspective did Frank no favors in my eyes.
Yes, girl, yes. I refuse to participate in the Frank redemption arc. I just won't do it.
22 hours ago, gingerella said:You'd think that would make me feel some sort of empathy for Frank but seeing him try to coerce Brianna to leave her mother and come with him was just dirty dog level shit. Fuck you Frank.
Reading these words is like listening to my favorite song on the radio, whilst in the car, breezing down the interstate with the windows down. Bliss.
22 hours ago, gingerella said:I know that some here watched the scene where modern Frank gives 1770's Brianna the nod/okay to go to America and look for Claire and Jamie, but I didn't read it that way. I was more perplexed because I don't think Frank would do that ever, he hated Jamie with a vengeance that never died. He blamed Jamie for fucking up his marriage with Claire. I don't think he even ever expressed appreciation that Jamie gave him the ability to be a father because he hated so vehemently that he could never break though Jamie's 'love shield' and get his Claire back. Frank never gave us the impression that he would ever accept another man to be his beloved daughter's father. Hell, he was down with spiriting her away from her own mother!
All of this. Brianna was absolving herself for looking for Jamie.
Random Things I Hate About This Episode:
- Brianna
- Frank
- Brianna and Frank's relationship
- Brianna, a former history major and daughter of a history professor, traveling back in time so woefully underdressed and under-equipped.
- Roger, a history professor, traveling back in time so woefully underdressed and under-equipped. WTF is up with the shpants, Rog?
- Stephen Bonnet
- Diseased ships and being captive at sea
- The return of the Hosebeast
- Piss-poor storytelling excuses for not being able to secure Laura Donnelly to return as Jenny Murray for this episode
- The casting for the Lizzie Wemyss character
- The glossing over of time-travel
Random Things I Liked About this Episode:
- Ian Murray, Sr.
- Joanie
- Brianna fixing the kitchen cabinet
- Brianna wearing Claire's gorgeous green coat from Season I (but seriously, how many trunks of clothes did she have at Lallybroch? She already took one with her on the Artemis and Marsali apparently altered several of the garments before Claire came back through the stones).
- PBJ
Being Completely Honest:
As a book reader first, I mostly don't like this episode because it is completely off-book, and the "Brianna goes to Lallybroch" section of Book 4 is a huge highlight in the story. Show didn't do it justice.
And now I will go petulantly to the corner.
-
1
-
3
-
-
21 hours ago, gingerella said:
I loved how his first concern after realizing was 'Dies Claire know.' Because if Jamie had said No, he would have been pissed off. I love his protectiveness of Claire.
Me too! This warmed my heart. Love me some Clairtaugh.
21 hours ago, gingerella said:They always shoot John with 'watery' eyes, don't they? It's like they always want him to be on the verge of tears or something. It's odd and I don't need that to know how he feels about Jamie, that's been made very clear already. Does anyone else notice that?
I noticed it with this episode especially. I chalked it up to him being feverish and sick.
21 hours ago, gingerella said:It's so interesting how jealous Claire is of John. She knows Jamie would never leave her for John, but hearing he offered himself to John as payment for taking care of Willy, that really jolted her, and I guess I would feel the same way if I was her. She and Jamie have never been able to raise a child together, and now it's too late for them to have another child so it's a very sore subject. A son was so important in those days too, so knowing that John 'has' Jamie's son, that's got to hurt Claire as well.
I actually really feel for Claire here (I know, I'm a Claire fangirl, but still). Twenty years is impossible to get back. And then to make it worse, Jamie went through some really terrible things without her, and no matter how much he talks about what happened with her (off screen, apparently), she wasn't there through it with him. For a good chunk of those years, John was. I think it would be difficult to not have some pangs of jealously where John is concerned. He knows a facet of Jamie's life that she never will, and it just so happens that those years produced his son (and yes, I still freaking hate that he has a son...but I digress...)
I also think the jolt was due to Claire knowing what happened to Jamie in Wentworth. John doesn't know about BJR, and so he couldn't truly have known the gravity of the situation when Jamie offered himself for Willie's care. That statement had to have been shocking to Claire on two fronts - bringing up Jamie's torture and recovery and then his desperation of even making an offer like that to John.
21 hours ago, gingerella said:When Jamie finds William on Cherokee land fishing, it seems awfully fishy, pun intended, that the Cherokee just happened to be passing by at that exact time.
Yes, a not so slick plot device to get Jamie to "confess" that Willie is his son.
-
5
-
-
3 hours ago, Anothermi said:
So my next favourite thing was THE RETURN OF MURTAUGH!!!
When he popped on the screen, I thought of you and your reaction.
3 hours ago, Anothermi said:^^This.^^ Again! This stuff is frustrating. Not to mention Claire is not even using the veg that the human's discard... but fresh—practically right out of the market—produce. The farmers that I grew up around had a slop bucket by the stove for the pigs. Everything the humans didn't eat went in there. NOTHING resembled fresh vegetables!
As a farm kid, this urked me. You don't give the good stuff to the pigs, which will happily eat just about anything. Further, I would imagine any good homesteader would have used those "scraps" (which didn't look too scrap-ish) to make stew or broth or something else edible for the people. As for the slop bucket, my grandparents definitely had one and it sat by the sink. When you would take your plate to the sink after your meal, you would scrape the remnant produce into the bucket. At the end of the day, the bucket would be dumped into the pig trough.
-
3
-
-
20 hours ago, gingerella said:
I could also watch general cabin life for like an entire season no problem!
Ah, me too. Why can't we see more of this? I want to see the cabin being built and them breaking all of that virgin ground for crops (the work of that!). Jamie making a table, a bed frame, laying stone for and blessing the hearth...sigh.
20 hours ago, gingerella said:So has it even been a year yet since the last episode? And in that time, that short time, they've managed to build a bitchin' cabin and filled it will all the accoutrement of a household that's been there for like 10-20 years?! Seriously? That cabin was STOCKED TO THE RAFTERS with all manner of both mundane and luxury stuff! How is that even possible?
I like to think that Auntie Jo sent some first-world provisions to the Back Country. She wouldna want them to rough it too much, ya ken? Jamie is a man of worth.
18 hours ago, gingerella said:I want to know if stuff like this!
Sounds like a perfectly practical, reasonable request. Perhaps Ian does a lot of hanging out with JQM?
4 hours ago, Cdh20 said:I am with you, Jamie & Claire need their own bedroom ( preferably with soundproof walls, cause Claire, you know).
Between your britches and backing her up against a tree comment last week and now this one, I'm seeing you in a whole new light. Day-um! I feel like I need a drink and I didn't even see anything (or do anything dammit!).
Can we talk about Murts for a second? The colonial air clearly agrees with him. He turned around from that forge like a freaking boss. His joy over Jamie's joy made my heart so happy, and let's be honest we could all use some of that these days.
Finally, I wasn't a fan of the Get In My Pantaloons Jamie Fraser Silversmith Wife subplot. We get it, JAMMF is a HAMF. He's a fine looking "45" year old. The whole context of that just seemed to be so pointless. How about skip that and show me more cabin building?!
-
1
-
2
-
-
I really like this one, mostly because I could watch Jamie, Claire, and Ian build a home all day. Like, in person. I want to sit there and watch them split logs and clear trees in person and just hang out with them.
Anywaaaayyyyy...
On 8/4/2021 at 7:30 PM, gingerella said:I could watch an entire season of them trying to build their homestead, making closer ties to the local Cherokee tribe, etc.
Me too! I enjoyed the interactions. And it was so interesting watching them make a home and how they did it.
On 8/4/2021 at 7:30 PM, gingerella said:There is no way they staked out the perimeter of 10,000 acres, so what exactly where they staking?
It was my interpretation that they were staking the perimeter of the treaty line with the Cherokee? Didn't Gov. Tryon give Jamie land adjacent to the treaty line? I caught just a quick peak at the map.
Also, Claire's breeches = A+. They did not get enough attention in this episode.
-
1
-
2
-
-
I'm a little behind on the forum thanks to a few tumultuous weeks, so I won't weigh in on all of the things mentioned so far. Two things that did bug me about this one -
1. Why was Roger selected to call Clan MacKenzie at the Gathering? Yeah, he's truly Scottish, but it makes no sense otherwise. He isn't American, and this is a heritage festival for Americans. Surely there were other MacKenzies?
2. I think this was mentioned. Why were there no Frasers?
I feel like there were a few continuity errors in this one. Overall, I enjoyed the segues from past to present. Lovely.
-
3
-
-
On 7/23/2021 at 1:46 PM, Cdh20 said:
I do not want all history sanitized but the show writers do have their work cut out for them to make some things acceptable to today's TV audience what with political correctness & hugely sensitive subjects.
Agree 100%. I think that is troubling, though. As a history enthusiast, it irks me we when we apply modern social norms to historical situations. In doing that, I think we miss out on the context and the true lesson to be learned from it. But I'll step down from my soapbox now...
On 7/23/2021 at 1:46 PM, Cdh20 said:I knew Jamie would not want to own slaves, because of being enslaved himself, but the show sort of ran with the idea that he could make their lives better, instead of that he could not own them at all!
I didn't like this choice from Show. I think it would have been much more powerful to have swapped it - Jamie absolutely cannot own slaves because of everything he's been through, everything he knows from Claire, and knowing that owning people is flat-out wrong. Instead they made it seem almost juvenile. "Welp! Let's try to make these slaves lives better!" It feels shallow.
On 7/23/2021 at 4:47 PM, Anothermi said:And character development is what I want from this show. The galumphing about—highlighting plot points and emphasizing the story over the character depth—is my biggest complaint about theses two seasons (3 & 4).
Perfect point. I feel like the characters are actually characters now, whereas before they were believable in their faults and their intentions.
-
2
-
-
On 7/22/2021 at 1:07 AM, gingerella said:
All the references to Indians and Slaves was so degrading, and shameful. I guess because this is my country's shameful history that is still being played out today - which makes it all the more awful - it was very difficult to watch and I got no pleasure from this episode save the few moments of Young Ian and Rollo.
Agree. Perhaps this is strange or even wrong, but I think it is important to see it so that we don't forget previous mistakes and have a deeper appreciation for sentiments that exist today. We still have a long way to go. I don't like the sanitization of history, no matter how hard it is to watch.
On 7/22/2021 at 1:07 AM, gingerella said:Phaedra spoke with a wee Scotch burr, oh yes tha' lass did. Why??? No native accent at all, like Rufus. Seemed odd.
16 hours ago, Anothermi said:I forgot to reply to this as well. I didn't actually notice the Sottish burr but I did take note that Phaedra appeared completely comfortable with Aunt Jocasta—enough to speak "familiarly" with her in Claire's presence. I'm sure that doesn't happen in the presence of other guests.
But I am quite willing to assume that Phaedra is supposed to have learned English from Aunt Jocasta—who still has her Scottish accent. I looked up the actor and, despite a very short bio, I learned that she is classically trained—meaning has studied and performed in Shakespearian plays. So, what ever her original accent was, she'd have likely learned the skills to give a good stab at a Southern U.S. accent if required.
15 hours ago, gingerella said:Actually, this makes me take.pause to wonder exactly when that Southern drawl accent developed because eight now in the Show, everyone is either English or Scottish, or slave.fro. Africa, or a Native American. There is no Southern accent yet. I wonder when that happened?
I'm so glad you brought this up, because it has always fascinated me. Basically, I think that in Phaedre's case, she was born in NC at River Run, and so she would have picked up the Scottish of the Camerons. Rufus was born in Africa, so he carried an accent. In general, I think that colonists carried their home accents with them and then as immigrants from different countries mingled together, the language and accent changed. Southern accents, though, are so distinct, and yes...where did that come from? Let's do a research project!
17 hours ago, Anothermi said:In her defence—it seems the rights to adapt are a whole-package deal. And she loses ALL rights to how the material is treated.
I think this is correct, and she has been openly critical of some episodes and/or various plot adaptations.
17 hours ago, gingerella said:Jamie has no clue how things work in this new world. Just because someone has a Scottish burr and comes from your people does not a friend or sympatico business partner make.
This is a really important consideration. Something to note too, many Scottish colonists did not join the other colonists in rebelling from Britain during the Revolution. Many were Loyalists - they had already lost one war against Britain, causing them to lose everything including their homeland. They weren't about to go down that path again. Claire and Jamie know the Revolution is coming, and she cautioned him about choosing the right side in the last episode.
17 hours ago, Anothermi said:Neither she nor Jamie would know the legal knots that were created to bind both enslaved and slavers to the economic system that benefited the white settlers. Jocasta knew—and had made her peace with them by treating her enslaved people with as much respect and care as the laws would allow. She and her husband could be deemed pragmatic. Jamie saw the need for that way before Claire did
I really try not to bring up book content (though it seems like I've been doing it a lot lately), but the show missed an important opportunity to further develop Jamie's character. It in the book, he gives this brilliant speech about why he could never own slaves...because he has been enslaved himself. It's a very moving scene. Claire is adamant that they cannot take over River Run and she is panicking a bit because she simply cannot be a slaveholder. It is flat-out wrong for them to do. She can't own people. Jamie allays her fears and is basically like, well duh, neither can I and here's why. But it is much more emotional than that.
-
4
-
-
7 hours ago, gingerella said:
Same, where is ther another Wilmington?
Wilmington, North Carolina is at the base of the Cape Fear River.
7 hours ago, gingerella said:I’d like to see a spate of happy times, to see the minutiae of their day to day lives, etc.
Me too!
6 hours ago, Camera One said:To me, with a story about a time traveler, one could imagine there are so many quandaries and difficulties that doesn't necessarily involve rape, kidnapping, violent assault and being on the run/threat of execution, etc.
I think you hit what’s missing right on the head, and that’s why the first season was so strong. Claire was trying to figure out her place in the past and how she got there, as well as the differences between past and present. We’ve lost that thread, aside from some throw-away lines here and there.
Which is why you may enjoy the books more (not to keep harping on it) because the time travel aspect is a stronger theme running through them.
I’m also a little critical of the writing in this episode. It seemed a bit disjointed or clunky to me. It was a whole lot of exposition and explanation, which felt a little cheap. While I typically don’t mind Claire’s voice-overs, there seemed to be a lot in this episode, which took the place of actual scenes we should have seen.
-
4
-
-
19 hours ago, Anothermi said:
Anyone else have a clue as to where Hayes got nabbed?
I believe they said they were in Wilmington.
19 hours ago, Camera One said:I'm thinking of trying to read the books to re-live the story again, except from a different perspective.
I definitely recommend them with the caveat that her writing style isn’t for everyone. There is a lot of minutia, and some people don’t like what seems to be inconsequential information. I find that I miss that level detail when I read other authors now, but everyone’s mileage varies.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, gingerella said:
Well THAT was mighty disappointing for me to sit through.
Yes, as far as season premieres go...yawn. Not the quality we're used to. I don't follow this type of thing like the die-hard die-hards, but I think Ron Moore stopped being the main show runner this season, and you could tell that here. Think back to Jamie gasping on a battlefield or Claire running from the stones in a panic, this doesn't even come close to that.
2 hours ago, gingerella said:Diana Gabaldon that she cannot write a story without constant misery, pain and death
I'm going to defend her. I'm not saying she doesn't deserve some criticism for the incessant violence in the story; however, the books are freaking enormous and so much content in them gets cut out in the show. There's a lot more time in the books for the story to breathe, and there is A LOT more joy and humor mixed in with the sadness and misery. Plot points like the Bonnet attack don't come out and slap you in the face as much in the books. Aaaaannnnnddd, you don't have Ray Charles singing over it either.
5 hours ago, Anothermi said:We got right into Which side are you on? early in the show.
Yes, and I love it! Bring it! Give me liberty, or give me death Outlander style. I. Am. Here. For. This. Now.
2 hours ago, gingerella said:I liked when Claire was describing the future of America and how people from all over the world will come - all hoping to live the American Dream
Me too, for all of the reasons you stated. I do also appreciate how she is always trying to provide Jamie with context, because how could you possibly envision or believe what she is telling you about the future?
2 hours ago, gingerella said:I love how they include the 20 years they were apart in the sum total of their marriage.
Me too. Even though they were with other people, the real marriage and partnership in their lives remained with each other.
2 hours ago, gingerella said:I like the actor who plays Young Ian, he's a great actor.
Honestly, he makes the show for me now. He steals every scene. Love his character in the book, and this actor so convincingly brings Young Ian to life. I want more. Can he have a spin off?
Other Things I liked -
- Jamie's description of the Regulators. A group never covered in American history, and their contributions to our freedom were so important. Plus, as someone who's formative years were in the 90's, when Claire asks, "Who are the Regulators?" My immediate thought is "Well, Warren G of course." Reeeeeggguuuuuuulatorrrrrrs, mount up!
- "Bees with honey in their mouths, have stingers in their tails." Words to freaking live by.
-
-
3
-
-
On 7/4/2021 at 3:30 PM, gingerella said:
Annnd we get another 'Mirror Scene', this time with Claire holding the bloody machete that she's just killed Geillis with, standing there shaking, looking at it, the same way she was standing there shaking as she looked at her bloody hands after she killed that red coat deserter who tried to rape her when she and Jamie were enjoying some honeymoon nooky on a hilltop in Scotland in S01. LOVE these mirror scenes!
Thought of you upon my rewatch of this one. There is also a mirror scene with Claire in the coach bustling to Rose Hall to find/save Young Ian. This is similar to the scene in Season II where she is racing to Bois de Boulogne to stop Jamie's duel.
On 7/4/2021 at 3:30 PM, gingerella said:and he is able to hold his breath long enough, and in absolutely clear water, to find Claire, KISS HER, then cut her ropes and swim to the surface with her, and ALL without helping her spit out the water she likely took into her lungs in the meantime.
That's actually my favorite part of the entire episode. Which I guess says how weak I feel this season FINALE (ya know, usually the episode in a series that is typically very strong and keeps people wanting more so they tune in next season) really was.
On 7/4/2021 at 3:30 PM, gingerella said:Anyway, after they find out they're in Georgia, in America, they hug and Jamie cries. I didn't get why though. Was he sad they weren't going to be going to Scotland any time soon? Or was it because they were now in America, where Brianna is born? Or was it because he could start anew there?
Show did a very bad job at explaining this plot point. In the full story, Jamie is desperate to know where they landed because he is uncertain if he can give his real name. When he finds out they are in Georgia, he is able to say that he is Jamie Fraser, not Alexander Malcolm or Alexander MacKenzie or Jamie Roy or Mac Dubh or any of his other aliases. In America, he can safely be Jamie Fraser and not live in fear of a price on his head or the uncertainty of a pardon. His name is so important to him and he can be Jamie Fraser again.
On 7/5/2021 at 7:18 PM, Anothermi said:The show seems to have miscalculated how many episodes they would need? We got half an episode wrapping up The Bakra—which only took 30 min—so they tacked on a prelude-to-Season-4 to fill out the rest? They were very distinct and different stories. There is a clunkiness about this adaptation that surprises me.
I think this is a really good observation. I feel like the show lost its point of view and forgot what story they were telling us in Season 3. The first half, the Scotland part anyway, was so strong, and then we had this great reunion, and then it really sputtered. There was so much filler - Claire doing a lobotomy, Claire traipsing around a desert isle, the whole plague ship - that I'm sure I could have lived without. Trust me, as an ardent book reader, there is A LOT of content and not all of it is good (see list immediately preceding), but there is a firm weave on the narrative throughout. The show has typically done a good job of narrowing things and focusing points that contribute to the larger story, but they really lost it here.
On 7/5/2021 at 7:18 PM, Anothermi said:(I won't go into Claire's stupidities as they have become a feature of her role now.)
Agree, and it is so disappointing to me.
Overall, I love that they are in America now, but I'm not a fan of the route they took to get there.
-
2
-
-
5 hours ago, gingerella said:
After four shit sundaes in a row, all I can say is IT'S ABOUT TIME!!!
Re-watching has given me such a fresh perspective. I feel like I dislike the past 4 episodes more than I dislike the Paris episodes. These last few just seem so chaotic and thrown together. Apparently, I had repressed that knowledge.
-
2
-
-
17 hours ago, gingerella said:
I would like to know if Claire's advising the calendar method, the Rhythm Method, or anal. These details are interesting and it's a shame the Show chose to omit them.
There are several contraception conversations throughout the books, and they ARE fascinating.
17 hours ago, gingerella said:It's all that's left of the supposed great love that was Dougal MacKenzie, but it seems like she's, 'Child? What child?" now, which doesn't play true to her elation that she was carrying Dougal's child when last we saw her.
I never got the "mother" vibe from Geillis. I've felt the baby was a device to hold onto Dougal, and not even in a romantic way, but more of a way of keeping him close for the sake of the uprising and the advantages to her situation that he could bring.
12 hours ago, Anothermi said:She chooses men by what they can do for her. Perhaps she described her feelings for Dougal in the way Claire would find believable. But having his child was just the current tool to her helping THE cause. She moved on as quickly as he did when it didn't pan out.
Yes!
-
4
-
-
18 hours ago, gingerella said:
Stuff I didn't like or thought was really, really stupid:
As I said, getting to the end involves a lot of stupidity. A freaking lot of stupidity. Who the F are these people? These are not my loves from Seasons 1, 2 and early 3. Highlanders of the Caribbean is no fun.
18 hours ago, gingerella said:I know Jamie wants to be That Guy, who always saves the day, but maybe he ought to dial it back a wee bit and he'll have better luck in the shit storm department going forward.
Ugh, you sadly raise some very strong points. Fash, Claire. You should definitely fash.
18 hours ago, gingerella said:I find as this season drags on, that my viewing notes are getting shorter and shorter and shorter because what can one say about Claire wandering around the jungle for what felt like half the episode?
I think I timed it once, and she spends a full quarter of the episode traipsing around the island. I get it already. It's hot and desolate and she's stranded. That time could have been much better spent telling us something else. I don't know...maybe we could have witnessed the terrible storm that just happened to wash Jamie and Co. to the EXACT same island.
I think I said that Creme de Menthe is the weakest of the season and the series as a whole. Was I wrong? Is it this one?
17 hours ago, Anothermi said:Why have they fallen into the trope of the dumb female who can't figure out what to do? Actually they swing back and forth between 'Claire is clever and resourceful' and 'Claire is clueless'. Claire was raised by an explorer Uncle. She learned how to cook over an open fire and must have learned how to avoid dangerous bugs and other animals as well—due to the locations he took her. (The one shown in her memory was in a desert like location, but they travelled all over.)
Claire knows enough to create shade for herself and drink dew (or rain) caught in a leaf, but not to make a plan when faced with "Uncharted" territory? Is her curiosity compartmentalized into medical-related only?
LOVE this observation and commentary. They are doing my girl a serious disservice. Very first episode, they set the tone with her being resourceful, using what is on hand, adapting to situations, etc. And now that woman is gone? Is she too far removed now from her upbringing and war years to call back on those skills? Were the 60s too cushy for her?
8 hours ago, Camera One said:definitely didn't want to spend another episode with Mamacita and the Father, but the whole finding Jaime and that reunion felt rushed, just as much as the first half of the episode felt like it was moving at the pace of soil creep.
Agree. The Fergus/Marsali wedding could have been given more time, as well as the Jamie/Claire reunion. I didn't feel invested in either, which is contrary to how I've felt about their other reunions and other weddings that have occurred on the show. When Jamie told Father Fogden that Fergus' last name was Fraser, I was kind like "meh."
-
1
-
3
-
-
4 hours ago, gingerella said:
All of this is even more perplexing when one takes into account that the lead characters are also co-producers.
They didn’t become producers until Season 5. Slip that into your back pocket for later.
Otherwise, yes to all of the things you all are mentioning. To be fair to the show, this source material is also rather WTF-esque at this point.
Also, I figured Mr. Pound was a goner the minute he licked his finger.
-
3
-
-
On 6/10/2021 at 2:44 PM, gingerella said:
And yet Claire's reaction is to revert to her, "SAME HERE!" reply, and she still doesn't seem to get that her loneliness included raising their daughter, having a vibrant career (and one that actually kept alive part of her life with Jamie), friends and colleagues, and yes a husband even if the marriage wasn't warm and caring there was someone there. I'm not sure why she doesn't or can't see that their separations weren't equal, not that it's a contest but...
I agree with you to a point. A person can seemingly have it all - the job, the family, the friends and connections, the house, etc. - and still feel wrong or as though they are living half a life. While she wasn’t living in a cave, or prison, or in constant danger, Claire never did fully devote herself to her life in Boston or fully feel the joy that should have come from it. Her pain was her pain, and I’m glad she had least made a point to tell him that it wasn’t all sunshine and lollipops.
On 6/10/2021 at 2:44 PM, gingerella said:she even says this exact thing when they're on the cliff and she says, "I had a life in Boston, I had my career, friends, etc....and you had your printshop in Edinburgh...it wasn't so bad, was it?"
And my point above is why this line bothers me and I feel it doesn’t fit in the context of the story. The show makes a point of showing us that Claire wasn’t entirely present in her Boston life. Joe and Bri both say it outright, and we see it for ourselves in her interactions with Frank and her less vibrant personality. I understand that she would have SOME doubts in going back to Jamie, but for her vocalize it like that and in those terms feels wrong to me.
-
1
-
3
-
-
10 hours ago, gingerella said:
By the way @Anothermi, it hasn't escaped me that this episode is called The Doldrums, and we, as two new Viewers, find ourselves stranded with our newly expanded crew nowhere to be seen on the horizon (except for @Camera One who is nearby!)...I wonder if @SassAndSnacks, @Beeyago, @Cdh20, @QuinnM & @Scarlett45 have all boarded the ship and are sailing away to Jamaica as we speak, or perhaps they're working for Sir Percival and are undercover...time will tell..
Sorry! I’m on vacation! And I hate responding to posts on my phone because I’m a bad phone typer.
I will say this - I’m not a fan of Highlanders of the Caribbean. I approve of the outcome but the getting there is stupid.
-
1
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:
Like many people she can understand sex with emotional attachment, but she seems to find sex simply for the drive for partnered sex distasteful.
I wonder if she felt it was distasteful for Jamie. The Jamie she knows wouldn't have done that, but this Jamie...who is this Jamie? She's trying to figure that out at that point.
6 hours ago, Anothermi said:I'm beginning to see Jamie's self opinion—that he is now a coward—as regret for sending Claire away.
Oh, wow...interesting.
5 hours ago, gingerella said:In fact, WHY THE HELL don't these two schmoes talk about THAT?! Claire also never says explicitly - even when Jamie is clearly jealous and upset over her being with Frank - she never says outright, "Frank and I only slept together a few times and I could never get you out of my head.
To me, it's almost as though Claire is of the mind that Frank didn't want to hear the gritty details about Jamie, Jamie likely wouldn't want to go there about Frank. It reminds me of what Jamie said to her when they parted just before Culloden, about her telling Frank whatever she wanted about him (Jamie) but that he (Frank) probably wouldn't want to hear it.
But yeah, she's leaving out some very important details about how shitty Frank was to her.
5 hours ago, gingerella said:"This is so much harder than I thought, boo hoo hoo, maybe it was all a mistake. We were happy, me in Boston and you with your print shop in Edinburgh..." I really wanted to kick her right in the shins to STFU because raising your daughter and having a vibrant career and friends is NOT equal to Jamie eeking out an existence in Edinburgh printing seditious materials and smuggling booze, FFS! Claire really needs to get her head out of her ass.
Just want to take a moment to point out that similar to what @Cdh20 told you about the lines you love the most coming directly from the books, the lines you hate the most are not in the books. Period. Glean from that what you will.
5 hours ago, gingerella said:There's no doubt that even if Claire had stayed, that the red coats wouldn't have taken her prisoner for being the wife of a treasonist.
Agree, and I think more should have been made of this. She was out there with him rallying troops and raising a militia. She treated rebel soldiers. She was on the scene of a suspicious death of a notable Duke. She leaves a wake, this one does. She was just as notorious. She would have captured and imprisoned, and who knows what would have happened to the baby.
5 hours ago, gingerella said:Also, and not for nothing, we cannot forget that the ONLY reason they're reunited now is because Claire took a risk and looked for him, and had good help in finding him.
YESSSSSSS!!!! Though, to be fair, it's not as though Jamie could look for her. Or did he....
5 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:For the record I HATE how they had Willie conceived. HATE IT.
Yay!!! Join my club, please!!! We can order jackets!!! I HATE THAT ENTIRE SUBPLOT.
2 hours ago, gingerella said:I mean, the guy had pity sex in a goddamn CAVE, does it get sadder than that?
Well, when you put it THAT way...
I agree with you on all fronts. This episode stands out to me because of the fantastic dialogue during their fight after Hosie and littles show up. However, you are touching on all of the frustrations that just don't make sense. The justification to Jenny and Fam and to each other was right there, and they didn't say it.
-
3
-
-
35 minutes ago, Anothermi said:
When we 1st meet her she is angry with Jamie for never sending word—for four years!—that he was still alive after BJR took him away. And then Claire shows up after 20 years having done the same thing to her. Of course Jenny is going to be irrational. That's proven to be who she is and how she reacts—and it might explain why Claire acted so guilty when Jenny confronted her.
Ok, ok. Making rational points again... I see your point, and I'm stifling my Jenny rage for a minute.
31 minutes ago, Cdh20 said:SassAndSnacks & I have agreed to disagree on this episode as well. 😘
Thank you! I DO actually like this episode. It frustrates me, yes, but I most appreciate that the big secret is out in the open, and I love me a good J&C argument. Plus, it has Ian, and I love Ian so much. I would watch an entire series that featured this character making wise quips to people.
What I don't appreciate are all of the silly plot points, which ok, that's DG's fault, but the show somehow managed to make these even sillier.
32 minutes ago, Scarlett45 said:Laoghaire was unhinged BEFORE all of those awful things happened to her
Yes, I had also forgotten, mostly because I try not ever think about her or this subplot, that Laoghaire was running fast and loose with some clansmen before she started to make a move on Jamie, thus the beating he took for her. In modern times, I don't care about that, in 1743, not a good look, methinks.
20 minutes ago, Scarlett45 said:I think it might have been more compelling if Laoghaire wasnt such an evil character, of course we dont want to ROOT for her, but if she had just been a young girl who had the hots for Jaime all those years ago (and did not try to have Claire killed), and then had to suffer abuse in her previous marriages- Jaime's conflict might be more understandable.
I absolutely agree with this. If we hadn't already seen the things she's done - the love spell, the witch trial, muttering under her breath after he thanked her, setting her girls upon him - I might be a little more sympathetic to her and understanding of his decision.
We have to suspend disbelief often as Outlander viewers, but for me, this is one point that I struggle to wrap my brain around.
-
2
-
-
14 hours ago, gingerella said:
Leery?!? Are.You.Fucking.Kidding.Me?!?!?
Sadly, no. The Hosebeast is no joke. Blech.
14 hours ago, gingerella said:Jenny, or should I call her JANET since she's acting like a cold bitch, is cold as ice to Claire and yet Claire's story of why she was away for 20 years DOES hold water.
YESSSSSSS!!!!!!! There are sooooo many Jenny fans, and I am not among them. I can understand her being miffed at Claire never communicating with them from Boston TO A POINT. And maybe Claire could have soothed that by explaining herself more, ie -
14 hours ago, gingerella said:Also, why didn't Claire tell Jenny and Ian that she didn't come back to Lallybroch because she didn't want the red coats to follow her there and punish Ian and Jenny for harboring the wife of a treasonist. THAT makes complete sense and yet it was never uttered despite it being said in a previous episode.
13 hours ago, Camera One said:I mean, Claire sitting there acting and looking guilty just taking what Jenny was saying to her. Maybe it's not a good idea to tell Jenny about the time travel, but why not at least say Claire was pregnant and arrived in America with nothing and could not leave her child to go back to Scotland and risk herself getting arrested (she could have said she feared even a letter could bring suspicion to Jenny).
THIS and THIS. Again, people are not communicating here! I also get annoyed that Claire just stands there and continues to take shit from Jamie about leaving ("You left me!") and then Jenny ("Family writes a letter.") and then doesn't defend herself. She did nothing wrong in regards to leaving and then coming back to find Jamie, and yet she is the one faced with the finger-pointing and blame.
14 hours ago, gingerella said:I nominate this comment for The Best Comment of S03 Award:
Ian: "When there's a pot 'o shite on ta' boil, ye stir it like it's God's work!"
YES!! I have formally incorporated this line into my daily lexicon.
14 hours ago, gingerella said:How can she not know how cutting that is to her brother? How can she not get that?!
Reason #57 that I'm no Jenny fan. (Please refer to the initial statement above.)
14 hours ago, gingerella said:And the whole 'Daddy! Who is that lady?! Why is Daddy yelling at Mommy" was utter bollocks.
Yes, this was actually gag worthy. I have friends who have close, loving relationship with their stepdads, who have raised them from a young age, and they still do not refer to them as 'Daddy." Fergus, for example, does not refer to Jamie in any title connotating a paternal relationship and Jamie IS his adopted father.
12 hours ago, gingerella said:On 11/9/2018 at 4:35 PM, Cdh20 said:Does no one relate to poor Laoghaire? We all love Jamie & all he loves is Claire (forever I hope)! I think it was perfectly understandable that it was Laoghaire- Jamie sent Claire to be with a man who loved her, why shouldn't he be with a woman who loved him? Jamie wasn't going to give his heart to anyone else anyway, so I actually feel sorry for Laoghaire that she ever married Jamie, as she didn't get the love she craved! Then in this episode she was extra aweful- so isn't it convenient that we hate her & that makes it so easy that she is the throw away new wife? What if Jamie had married someone nice like Mary McNabb? What ever happened to her anyway??
To be honest, no I have no sympathy or empathy for Leery so I cannot relate to her at all. Not.one iota. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Null. The empty set.
Me neither, and maybe that makes me a cruel, unempathetic person, but so be it.
9 hours ago, Anothermi said:But I harken back to Murtagh's conversation with Claire when Claire was teasing Jamie about seeing him kissing Leery. Murtagh told her 1) not to make fun of him, and 2) Leery was not for Jamie because even 50 years from then she would still be a girl and Jamie needed a woman. This scene proved that Murtagh ( 😢 ) is a good judge of character.
Oooh, yes. I'm ashamed to admit that sometimes I forget about this. Diana gave us the clues to this relationship all along. Had Murtagh been around, he would have countered Jenny and this wouldn't have happened.
4 hours ago, QuinnM said:This episode has made me crazy for a long time for any number of reasons.
1. Claire at least twice has watched Jamie struggle with telling her ‘something’ and she’s given him an out every time with the ‘it’s ok you don’t have to tell me everything now’. And coward that Jaime was he took the escape given him. So Claire has some ownership. He only really got to the second sentence when they got to Lallybroch. The second sentence was listen with your heart.
I think had he gotten the chance to go past that second sentence, Claire would have been pissed and a little hurt, but she would have understood. He didn't get that chance and all she got was "Daddy" and being called a huir by the Hosebeast.
I've always felt that having a little girl with red hair come into the room was the real blow here. The red hair and the "Daddy" had to have evoked so many emotions in her - Faith and Brianna never knowing their father, Jamie never raising them, picturing Brianna as a young girl with red hair and not saying "Daddy" to Jamie. That was the real gut check. Then, Hosebeast storms in with insults flaring, it was a lot to process immediately. Had it come calmly, as the William reveal did, I think Claire would have digested it all much better.
5 hours ago, QuinnM said:2. He did not lie to Claire. Secret, yes but not a lie. He did not have anymore children. He did not love anyone but her. So where is the lie here Claire?
But was it a lie by omission? I'm not disagreeing with you, I just think it is a little gray. Claire certainly felt that he lied. And I know she gave him an out several times, but this is a pretty big deal. He should have forced the story with her, whether she had given him the out or not.
5 hours ago, QuinnM said:3. I don’t believe for one second that Marsali and Joanie just happened on Jamie during Hogmanay. Lerry sent them to reel in that vulnerable fish. And great that Jenny was pushing the match. Her last match was anybody willing to live in a cave so I’m not real impressed with Jenny’s choices.
PFTTT!!!! I just spat coffee all over my screen. BEST JENNY SYNOPSIS EVER.
5 hours ago, QuinnM said:So in conclusion the title Crazy Bitch could pretty much be claimed by any number of crazy bitches in this episode.
Agree. None of the ladies - Hosie, Claire, or Jenny came out of this one looking great. And Jamie, wow...really not great.
All hail Ian Murray, Sr. - the victor of Outlander characters!!
-
4
-
S04.E09: The Birds & The Bees
in Outlander
I sincerely feel that there should be an Ian(s) (both Young and otherwise) and Murtaugh spinoff. I know Sam and Graham did the whole Men in Kilts thing, but it's these 3 that I really love.
And I agree, I absolutely LOVE the homesteading bits. I want so much more of that. I would watch hours of Ian and Murtaugh distilling liquor.
This was completely brutal. I have always appreciated how this show doesn't shy away from things - miscarriage, ptsd, etc. Each rape is different, and I appreciate that, too. But, there's something extra horrific about this one, and it makes me so sad. I don't often care for this actress and her delivery, but I thought she nailed this.
Me too. I was so disappointed upon my first watch and have felt even less moved with each subsequent viewing. There's something missing. I don't even care about the pissing (I like to think that Claire developed some early hand-sanitizer and Jamie quickly used it before he turned around and then lovingly touched his daughter's face...LET ME BELIEVE IT!). Her putting her hand on him as he tried to walk away from her really bothers me. It's like the script says "Brianna puts her hand on Jamie's shoulder to stop him" and so that's what they did. It feels forced and very intentioned. I think the ages of the actors makes it hard too. They look too close in age, even though Jamie should be 26 years older than Bri.