WatchrTina

For those of you who like the behind-the-scenes technical stuff, here's an article on lighting Outlander. (It was shared by Diana on Facebook so if you follow her there you've probably already seen this.) https://britishcinematographer.co.uk/dp-alasdair-walker-and-gaffer-scott-napier-on-illuminating-and-capturing-the-world-of-outlander/?fbclid=IwAR0ciVvjXolds4seo_cWkXjX6if57YT76O26vDiyzC32BPqbei1zDBh79B8

Well, that was a thrill ride but -- as with the entire series -- I found it hard to follow. I guess the good news/bad news is that since I could not entirely follow the plot (and what I did follow is rapidly fading from my brain) I can come back in a few weeks/months time and re-watch the whole thing again, seeing it as if for the first time. I also have to say that there is a lot of talk on this board about "Jake" who I presume is the third personality that we caught a glimpse of in the teaser at the very end. But how do you all know his name is Jake? Is it because that's a known fact from the comic book? (*Is* there a comic book?) And how is he now tooling around in a limo with the corporeal manifestation of an Egyptian god? Isn't one of his alternate personalities married to Layla? Wouldn't she wonder about his disappearances? I now realize that the existence of a 3rd personality (a very violent personality) was hinted at by the recurring instances of Marc and/or Steven suffering "lost time" during which some serious fighting (and international travel!) went on. But for me, that revelation came right out of the blue and feels like a bit of a cheat. Then again -- as some on this board have already mentioned -- "cheating" appears to be a major theme in Khonshu's dealings with the world, as shown when he very specifically released only Marc and Steven from his service. So this third personality is still (presumably) bound to him. Well anyway, that was fun. If there is a second season, count me in. If not, I probably won't even notice.

I, on the other hand, have only a passing familiarity with Egyptian mythology . . . or at least that was the case until the TV show "American Gods" came along. Due to THAT show I feel like a freaking amateur Egyptologist and I am loving how the scraps of Egyptian religion/mythology that I learned on THAT show are enhancing my enjoyment of THIS show. May I add that "Taweret temping as guardian of the afterlife" is just the best thing ever and the animator who is responsible for her adorable little ear wiggles deserves a raise.

Okay so Khonshu (the god who sounds suspiciously like Antonio Salieri <wink>) had at one time used Harrow as his human avatar, but he fired Harrow in favor of a new human avatar -- one who happens to suffer from multiple personality disorder. Well, that's a bold strategy Cotten. Let's see if it pays off for him. <<WatchrTina skitters off to watch the last two episodes>>

I will cheerfully suspend disbelief (and history) for the purposes of a fun SciFi romp, but that Alexander the Great reveal was a bridge too far. I'll bet actual historians and Egyptologists (if any watch this show) metaphorically felt their heads explode over that one.

Ugh. I had forgotten about the glass in his shoes. He did that to make walking difficult so that he appears vulnerable and human to his followers, right? I'm guessing that he thinks that without the glass to remind him to slow down, his god-hood would be (prematurely) revealed. But didn't we just see a whole pyramid full of Egyptian deities who are currently passing for human without putting glass in their shoes? Why can't he just ACT like a <insert Hulk voice> "puny human"? UPDATE: Wait a sec, he IS just a puny human, isn't he? He had some super skills for a while that were due to his having the scarab in his possession but he's actually just a human. Gods I'm confused. I love Marvel and I love Oscar Isaac so I'm trying REALLY hard to love this show but . . . it's hard work. Wait what? Several of you have mentioned this and I completely missed it. Sigh. I'm going to have to watch this all again aren't I?

This reminds me of the show "Orphan Black" where one actress played many MANY different roles (because, clones) and I was impressed by her playing each one as having a distinctive personality, but I was blown away when she had to play one clone masquerading as another. So, yeah, if we get a scene where Marc has to play meek Steven or (even better) Steven has to step up and play confident Marc, that will be highly entertaining. (And you just know Oscar Issac will be able to pull it off.)

I'm having the same reaction to this ep as I did to the last one -- absolute fury at the physical and psychological abuse that Martha suffered at the hands of Nixon's political operatives. We can't know, of course, how accurate this is but I sure am feeling a lot more sympathy for THIS version of Martha Mitchell than the one I recollect from the newspaper and TV news stories back when the Watergate scandal broke. I cheered when she broke her jailor's finger and I practically levitated with anger when he drugged her. Thank goodness her husband fired the ones involved. I want to believe that the love and mutual devotion between those two is real. As for everyone else . . . what an appalling bunch of inept and/or psycho individuals. It's actually a bit depressing to watch. It's also a bit depressing that there is so little discussion of the show on this board because I presume that reflects a general lack of interest in the show. Too bad . . . there are a LOT of really talented people involved. But Watergate was a sad chapter in our history and the aftermath dragged on FOREVER. I have a recollection -- as a young person -- of TV coverage of the trials that just went on and on and on. I guess I can understand why those who lived through it might not be interested in reliving it; and as for those born afterward --there have been other, more recent scandals that are probably of more interest to them.

Wow. What a window into the colossal shit-show that was the Watergate break-in was. I'm old enough to remember Watergate but I was too young to have paid close attention to its ins and outs -- especially at the beginning -- so this was really interesting for me. But oooooh I did not like the way that goon threatened Martha. I recall having a low opinion of Martha "The Mouth of the South" Mitchell back in the day but this depiction of her situation throws a whole new light on the subject. I guess that's the point. Bottom line: I'm in.

BTW his name is Charles Vandervaart (I forgot to mention that above) and his IMDb profile has a LOT of pictures of him as a child actor, so he's got a lot of experience under his belt even at the tender age of 21.

For those of you who Facebook, Diana posted about the casting of adult William, complete with comparison phots of him and Sam in nearly identical poses and costumes. I'll try posting the link below but I've have mixed success in the past trying to post links to Facebook. I've long wondered what was going to happen when it came time to cast adult William. There are a number of key moments in the books when William's uncanny resemblance to Jamie plays a significant role in the plot. The guy they cast is certainly plausible as the offspring of Geneva Dunsany and Jamie Fraser but I don't think anyone would declare the new guy to "be the spit of" Jamie (to use Murtagh's expression.) (The sentence above is a wee spoiler for non-book readers so I masked it.) Anyway, here's a link to the image contained in Diana's Facebook post: https://scontent.faus1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/279916022_546363043520621_6241983521758411140_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-6&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_eui2=AeHds9WzZcjWzhKHx-ElXfFPLXp8ppiEmTotenymmISZOmx-PUyFoIUA2prK3xvZJyA&_nc_ohc=TZdcCAGrMpkAX9YYZna&_nc_ht=scontent.faus1-1.fna&oh=00_AT8b5wVHN0qtkfs-UTjU-gKQ8Bs1nANX5kAQZHSAMjYDKQ&oe=62799038

I presume it's because Sean Penn WANTED to disappear into the role. Some actors like the assistance of heavy makeup as a way to really "sell" the new persona. Others (I suspect) enjoy the professional challenge of acting in heavy prosthetic makeup. From what I've heard of Sean Penn, it would not surprise me if the challenge of the transformative makeup was one of the main reasons he was interested in the role.

Ditto to everything you said. I'm only just now getting around to watching this episode because I hate, hate, HATE the Christie storyline and the only thing I hate MORE is that creepy guy in the tricorn hat (I can't be bothered to remember his name) and his bullshit "committee of safety." The one thing that was getting me through this episode was Jamie sticking to Claire's side like glue, so naturally that comfort was ripped away. It's been a while since I read the books so I honestly didn't remember Ian riding to Jamie's rescue at the end. As such, that was a nice surprise and it saved the episode for me. And now another Droughtlander begins. (Sigh.)

Outlander gets a wee mention in this Scottish comedienne's YouTube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJpyIOM5cpU Edited to add another video by the same comedienne who, alas, totally MISSES an opportunity to include an Outlander reference in her spiel about some Scottish standing stone. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0Gezl1PMDY

Oh AMEN! Let me say first that I love this book series. LOVE it. But every now and then Diana takes us down a dreary plot line that I just cannot WAIT to be over. The whole damned, dysfunctional, toxic "Christie Family Saga" is the worst example of that phenomenon. I can't wait until it is over. That being said . . . if Jamie and Claire were just happy, healthy, hardworking settlers -- benevolent landlords overseeing a group of trusted and treasured neighbors/tenants -- the book would quickly get boring. Drama, alas, requires some kind of conflict. So I'll gird my loins and stay tuned through this ugly shit-storm of a plot-line. Thank goodness we have the serenity and joy of the AMERICAN REVOLUTION to look forward to <insert sarcasm emoji>.

Ooooh can I piggyback on this comment to say that the show's use of modern pop songs -- rewritten for an 19th century orchestra -- is one of my FAVORITE aspects of the show. I love trying to figure out the source song.

And her sister is now a Duchess so she will always be sought after by the kinds of people who want to rub shoulders with the well-connected. Those may not be the kind of people that Eloise wants in her life but many doors will be open to her due to her sister's high-status marriage so that, coupled with her family's wealth, pretty much ensures a cushy future.

Man, this show requires SO much effort to figure out who all the characters are and how they are related. Specifically I find I am STILL confused by the two Sharma sisters and how they are related. They have the same father and different mothers, right? And London was shocked by the father's decision to marry the first wife, who was of lower rank, right? And that's why the elder Miss Sharma was never presented at court? But the father remarried after Miss Sharma's mother died and now her younger half-sister IS being presented at court because SHE had an acceptable mother. Have I that right? (Her mother must also be dead, otherwise the mother would be supporting her daughter in her debut year. And was the late, second Mrs. Sharma somehow related to Lady Danbury and that's why SHE is sponsoring Edwina in her debut year? I SWEAR I am paying attention -- I watched the episode twice -- but it is all SO confusing.) That being said, what a beautiful show. It's a delight to the eye, even as it cofounds my brain.

Oh THANK you for sharing that! Can I quote the best line? He offers some unsolicited advice regarding Jamie's out-of-the-blue decision to confess to Claire about his night in the cave with Mary MacNab saying, "Brother you got to take some stuff TO THE GRAVE!!!"

Interestingly, STARZ is now co-promoting a new show alongside Outlander. I've just seen an ad for Outlander coupled with "Death and Nightingales." It looks like another costume drama, set in a similar time-frame. So I guess I know what I'll be checking out after Outlander finishes this year's shortened run.

Here's a link to the TVLine review of episode S6.E6, The World Turned Upside Down. https://tvline.com/2022/04/10/outlander-recap-season-6-episode-6-the-world-turned-upside-down/ which includes the following, delightful quote:

RANDOM THOUGHTS WHILE WATCHING The closed-caption typist is not a fan. They wrote "When we were in Paris and we lost faith . . ." not Faith. Whoever wrote that didn't understand the reference to Jamie and Claire's first child. (This bugged me to an unreasonable degree.) They also captioned Brianna's use of the word "Da" as "Dad" and I can't even . . . THE GOOD Oooooh, I like the reference to Claire having a nightmare/vision/premonition of a "snake in the house." Was that from the book? I do so love those occasional hints we get to Claire's supernatural gifts. The quiet conversation in bed between Jamie and Claire was a really nice moment. Adso! (Good grief, that's an adorable cat.) THE BAD I hate that in both the show and the book Claire can't really be 100% sure what, if anything, happened between her and Malva due to her hitting the ether again. Claire, JUST SAY NO! (Her use/abuse of that drug just feels so wrong.) Is it really credible that Claire would have spent that much time in Malva's company and NOT noticed that she was pregnant? (Especially as she was played by such a petite woman.) THE UGLY Malva's death. Ugh. Aaaaand here we go into a plot-line that I hate with the white-hot passion of a thousand suns. I mean, I know Claire was hoping she could save the baby but . . . ugh! I hate, hate, HATE her attempted Cesarean in the book, though of course it was absolutely in character of her to try (with no thought of the consequences to herself if the attempt was unsuccessful). Oh and the false accusation that Jamie fathered Malva's child . . . I've always DESPISED that plot-line. I was really annoyed with Diana when she wrote the scene of Claire fleeing the room after the false accusation was made and, alas, they kept it in the show. I know that later (both in the book and the show) Claire declares that she never actually believed it, and that she was just so upset and shocked by the ugliness of the accusation that she needed to be AWAY from the Christies. But still . . . I've always felt that her failure to immediately say "Bitch Please!" in response to Malva's accusations was out of character. (But as a wanna-be writer I get that it was necessary for Claire to be SEEN to be very upset by the accusation, thus giving people a credible reason to believe her capable of killing Malva.) I really DO love this book series but absolutely everything touched by the Christies turns to shit, so this part of the book is just SO depressing. It really says something that I'm looking forward to a WAR if it means we can get away from the *&^%$#@! Christies.

Does anyone remember the movie "Clue"? In it the late, great Madeline Kahn has a line where she says "I hate him SOOOO MUCH . . . it's like . . . FLAMES . . . flames coming from the sides of my head . . ." That's how I feel about Book!Malva. As such, I could not make myself watch tonight's episode because I suspect she's gonna be a major player in it (based on what I recollect about the source material.) Maybe tomorrow.

Double-posting to share what I've learned about Season 2 of "Men in Kilts" (Sam and Graham's travel show) from an article in Parade magazine (link below.) Here's the link to the article: https://parade.com/1301943/tinadonvito/men-in-kilts-season-2-sam-heughan/ It seems clear that "Men in Kilts" will not air at the same time that "Outlander" is releasing new episodes. They'll save it to use it as a promotional tool in the gap between Outlander seasons. (Think of it as a light refreshment during the upcoming "Droughtlander.")

Sam did an interview with his "frenemy", Josh Horowitz at the 92 Street YMCA in NYC. (I think it's clear that Josh and Sam are actually good friends in real life and they just play enemies online). It was very entertaining. It took place mere days before Season 6 started airing so they carefully avoid any Season 6 spoilers. I'll put the link below but first here are a few highlights. Next season (7) has 16 episodes! Did y'all know that? If I ever knew that I had forgotten it. What wonderful news! Sam is writing a book (with the help of a co-writer). He said he's doing it "for myself" and that it is "a sort of biography-meets-an-adventure that I undertook at the end of October last year." Sam talked about the new season of "Men in Kilts" (his travel/adventure show with Graham McTavish) in which they go to New Zealand (which, of course, Graham has fond memories of due to his work on the trilogy of Hobbit movies.) And now I have to figure how (if) we can see that in the USA. They mentioned that an Outlander prequel series is in development and I think I've heard about that before but nothing about that topic stuck in my mind so I was excited to be reminded of that. So anyhow, here's the link to the interview. Enjoy! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FS0mrtaHdLE