Hybiscus

Episode 2: Discussing Jessica Jones Misty: I heard about her. Thought she'd be bigger. Captain: Says she was following a client. Bet this scared the shit out of her. Misty: Rumor is she ain't scared of much. Captain: Well, she ain't met you. Entering a house filled with medieval weapons: Colleen: Is it weird that I want to live here?

Yep, he spends most of his time moping. And yes, it does get old really fast.

How can you make the most boring intro to this series? Start with Danny Rand. The story moved fairly nicely until we got to the Danny/ Colleen scenes. Surprised (and delighted) to see Madam Gao left holding the bag... literally! This Sigourney Weaver character must be some crazy-powerful person Gao to be her subordinate. Loved seeing my favorite supporting characters, Foggy & Misty & especially Claire. ETA: Oops, I forgot Trish and Malcolm. Love them, too.

So glad I came into this thread. I'm way behind on watching eps. I HATE the whole BMOL storyline (which is why I'm behind) and now knowing that not only does Eileen die, but that Toni the Torturer comes back has just made me delete all my unwatched eps and cancel further recordings. Ugh. Just. Ugh.

Is anyone else bothered by the amount of commenting Diana does about the show? It seems to me that she has to post something whenever there's a change to the book, whether she liked it or not, and in some cases, spoil the show (i.e., want to talk about something prior to it being aired). Granted, she has been kept on as a consultant (which probably gives her more leeway than other story originators), but basically she signed away the rights to control the story when she sold the story to Tall Ships. In some cases, she seems to be bordering on things that might be a contractual issue. Then again, I understand she has always engaged with her fans, which I'm sure helps in Outlander's popularity. I recognized your name from the "no book talk" thread. :) Many of us come over to see what your group's thoughts are about the show. It's interesting to get a fresh perspective. I know! ( Because I'm nearsighted.) There's no such thing as "driving glasses" like "driving gloves." Either you need glasses for everything at a distance (which includes driving) or you need them to read. Ok, you might need them for both, in which case you get bifocals. I have those, but I still take them off for reading (& computer stuff).

melody16, I agree with you that Jack Randall isn't complex or "nuanced" as so many others believe. He was a poorly conceived villain from the very beginning because his soul purpose was to be the bad guy. His "complexity" is due to the fact that so many people adore Tobias Menzies. That's why I'm so glad the show didn't choose to redeem his character, or have Jamie attend the wedding. I do find Dougal to be interesting. I don't necessarily like him, but I understand his motivations. He's a frustrated alpha male. He was born a second son, always in Colum's shadow; and his one chance at being a leader was the Jacobite rebellion, but he had to fall under Jamie's command. So much of his actions make sense. But I can understand why you're frustrated with the story. I wonder if the tv show Outlander might not have been better had it not had such a huge, passionate following. That way there wouldn't have been so many expectations to live up to, and we could just enjoy the story as it's presented.

I was wondering what to watch tonight, what with all the mainstream programs having had their season finales. Then I read about Outlander's renewal notice, World Outlander Day (hee!), and that Starz had episode 209 OnDemand. Wow! Just, wow! From beginning to end, it was filled with happy moments, sad moments, beautiful moments, and heart-breaking moments. Such great writing, directing, acting, and haunting music. I would have loved the episode even if (Lord John) William Grey hadn't made his first appearance. He is my absolutely favorite character. Well, maybe not more than Jamie, but more than Claire (in the books). I like the change of Claire taking the initiative during Jamie's interrogation. In the book, I really hated the way Jamie treated her during this scene, stripping her top off. This worked much better from the teamwork aspect. I don't think the writers were pandering at all to the fans with this change. This episode was written long, long ago, at least 1 year ago, and probably even much earlier than that. Let's face it, where Outlander is concerned, the internet will lose its collective shit regardless. The first scene of Jamie & Claire in the "cabin" really punched me in the gut. The complete and total love these characters have for each other is so strong, and the foreshadowing of them being apart just squeezed my poor little heart to pieces.

Ok, here's my unpopular opinion: I don't think Tobias Menzies's performance as Black Jack Randall is all that great. People say it's "nuanced" and "complex" but all I see is evil sneering and goading. I've been watching "The NIght Manager" and Tobias's character has the same curled lip. Granted, BJR is a tough role to play, mainly because he's simply "evil" without any underlying cause, and Tobias probably does the best he can with the role. But I just don't think he's all that amazing.

Claire states in the first episode of the series that after WWII, she took up an interest in plants & herbs and their healing properties. It had become a hobby for her, just as Frank's had become his ancestry, which is why she knew so much about BJR.

I finally realized that Claire only cares about changing the future when it suits her. The whole crux of season 2/DiA is to change history, and yet she's not concerned about Frank when BJR is supposedly trampled to death by cows; later (in a previous episode) she notes that BPC's plan of united England & France cant work because the two countries won't be allies for another 100 or so years. But now it's all about keeping the history in tact so that Frank can come into existence. pfft! Claire gets a big old raspberry from me in this episode.

Note to Ronald D. Moore: That Richard Kahan is a keeper! I pretty much agree with what everyone has said so far. The arrival of Black Jack Randall totally sucked the life happiness out of the show. Hated how Claire manipulated Alex Randall for her own selfish needs. But it's somewhat consistent with the book. I remember absolutely despising how Claire forced Jamie to not kill BJR in the book. (Paraphrasing here): Claire: What about Frank?? Me: Who gives a fuck? Just one other thought: It's a good thing BPC is so self-centered, otherwise he'd see what a lousy liar Jamie is. OH! And when Jamie picked up Fergus with Claire looking on... my heart melted.

Loved it! I was actually surprised at how closely the episode followed the books. But since I'm not a huge fan of the books, having read DiA only once (and only the first 3 novels), I didn't even remember the bite marks scene. (Just as I don't remember the "sausage" scene discussed in the forum of last week's episode.) I found many things to be happy about: Jamie talking about that little fortress inside you, Jamie & Claire reconnecting, Fergus's understanding of women (damn, the kid is so attractive!), Murtagh wondering about Suzette (there was also a little look between them when Claire, Mary & Murtagh finally returned home), and Alex telling Mary he loves her. I know there's much more I loved, but I have to watch it again to remember them all.

This is more faithful to the books? I thought the '70s version was pretty faithful, enough so that I was never dissatisfied with it. Based on casting alone, this version seems pretty crappy to me. Aidan Turner is fine as Poldark, but he's not tall enough. The gal who plays Demelza hasn't sold me yet, and the woman who plays Elizabeth chick is just awful. I'll continue to watch it for awhile, but this is a classic case of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

I believe Diana said she was on board once she saw his audition tapes, which was later the same day. (She'd been in the car when she got word of his casting, and couldn't see the audition until she got home.) I don't know if Sam dyed his hair for the auditions, but everyone said he was Jamie, which kind of surprised them. (His audition scenes included the scene with Dougal about showing his back in "Rent" and the spanking scene.) It's been mentioned elsewhere on this forum that Sam seems to have the ability to disappear into any role he takes on.

Two new interviews with Sam Heughan: EOnline's Outlander's Sam Heughan Talks "Shock" of Emmy Buzz for His Fearless and Risky Performance Carter Matt ‘Outlander’ Emmy exclusive: Sam Heughan on Jamie’s defining moments, filming process, season 2 work Looks like they'll be going to Prague soon to film the Paris scenes.

Dang, Keeta, you beat me to the snark! :D

I haven't seen this brought up anywhere—not here or other forums or any reviews of the episode. I'm slightly timid to ask, because it's regarding the flashback scenes, and I don't want to be seen as dwelling on those, but I'm curious if other people caught what I did and wondered about the implications. In the second flashback scene, Jamie is crawling on the floor and very bloody. It's absolutely shocking. The implications of the bloody thighs is obvious, but his face and mouth are also bloody. This leaves me to believe he's been through a lot more torture that we didn't see. Then, in the last flashback, Jamie seems to be cleaned up a bit, especially his face. He's still dirty, but it appears that the blood has been washed away. Did anyone else pick up on that? If so, what's your interpretation? Did BJR clean him up for the final act or something? I guess I'm just looking for some understanding, and would appreciate anyone else's thoughts.

Don't bother looking up a definition of "torture porn." It's one of those terms, regardless of what the dictionary says, where everybody's got their own definition. For me, rape is a form of torture, and Jamie was raped, even when he responded to Jack. "Porn" is something I consider gratuitous, graphic sex for no other sake. This wasn't porn, to me. It was graphic, it was damned uncomfortable, but it was necessary to the story. Had they not been included it, I wouldn't have truly understood why Jamie wanted to die, how Jack had "ruined" Jamie for Claire.

What questions did you ask? And of course, what were her answers? Oh, and which 2 books?

The lack of Jamie's physical sickness didn't bother me. It never made a lot of sense to me in the books, since he had initially been on the road to recovery. His mental state was much more at stake, and, as you say, this was brought out clearly. His desire to kill himself in the tv show was just as dire his infection in the book. Whether he dies from physical ailment or mental doesn't matter. Dead is dead. But the fact that it was emotional was all the more poignant, in my opinion.

As someone who has a "glass face," it isn't all that surprising that Claire can fake it with Sir Fletcher. When you have time to prepare for the encounter, you can make the fake-out work. When it's an immediate reaction to circumstances, forget about it.

never mind... post was Scotch-induced...

Yes. And it goes up pretty quickly. I'll be up watching. And am now going to begin my mini-marathon. Scotch will have to wait until after dinner.

Oh no! That's awful! If you call the cable company, they can likely hook you up immediately. Most cable companies have 24/7 support. If that doesn't work, go to Starz website. There might be something there that can get you hooked up.

Re: Nathan Hale quote: Glad you found the show. It's always great to binge watch. I didn't find Outlander until this past December, so I didn't have to wait a week for a new episode. I miss those days. Regarding the Nathan Hale quote. There was quite a bit of discussion up thread about whether anyone British would know it.The Brits on the forum said no. In fact, they spend very little time on the American Revolution in their education curriculum. . (Don't even call it the American Revolution.) I suppose a Brit interested in American history might know the quote, but I think it's far fetched. My vaccination scar is on my upper arm. I've had two in my life, once as a child and again when I went into the U.S. Navy. I was super surprised to find out it's not longer needed. (!!) I'm the same as you, older and never married. Initially I thought I'd never stay in the 18th century. But perhaps I would if I'd found my soul mate there. Love is a powerful thing and everything is better in the presence of good company!