S05.E06: Better to Marry Than Burn

[Athena]

Quote

The Regulator Rebellion reaches a boiling point, forcing Jamie to face his fear.

Reminder: This is the No Book Talk topic. No discussion of the books is allowed including saying "in the books..." Posts may be removed without warning.

[ferjy]

Very emotional scene with Murtagh and Jocasta and superb acting from Maria Doyle Kennedy. It was interest seeing some of Jocasta’s backstory. 

Back to rutting from Jamie and Claire. Sorry, I’d rather see more of the healing (and I really dislike Caitriona Balfe’s angry face 😛 ).

Nice to see Lord John Grey, if only briefly.

I don’t know the actor playing Wylie, but he was brilliantly smarmy. I kinda wanted to see more of him! 

Not enough scenes with Fergus and Marsali. They need to write in some lengthy dialogue for Fergus. He’s being resigned to giving us short side  (though appreciably smouldering) glances. We need to see more of this gorgeous man. And I like the character. Young  Romann Berrux played him so well, but we’ve barely been given a chance to see César Domboy use his acting chops. I hope they expand his role eventually. 

 

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Finally, Roger does something useful!

Poor Jocasta. She gave Murtagh a chance to speak his mind before she accepted that crusty old dude's proposal so having him show up the night before the wedding to ask her to wait for him was not cool. All he accomplished was breaking her heart again.

Ugh, Wylie is so gross. He just oozes skeeviness.

I'm not into angry sex so the barn scene with Claire and Jamie just had me shaking my head.

6 hours ago, ferjy said:

Not enough scenes with Fergus and Marsali.

I agree. I'd much rather see more of them than Bree and Roger.

[nara]

8 hours ago, ferjy said:

Very emotional scene with Murtagh and Jocasta and superb acting from Maria Doyle Kennedy. It was interest seeing some of Jocasta’s backstory. 

Back to rutting from Jamie and Claire. Sorry, I’d rather see more of the healing (and I really dislike Caitriona Balfe’s angry face 😛 ).

Nice to see Lord John Grey, if only briefly.

I don’t know the actor playing Wylie, but he was brilliantly smarmy. I kinda wanted to see more of him! 

Not enough scenes with Fergus and Marsali. They need to write in some lengthy dialogue for Fergus. He’s being resigned to giving us short side  (though appreciably smouldering) glances. We need to see more of this gorgeous man. And I like the character. Young  Romann Berrux played him so well, but we’ve barely been given a chance to see César Domboy use his acting chops. I hope they expand his role eventually. 

 

Agree with everything you said.

Gods of casting, can you please give Maria Doyle Kennedy a role where she gets to be happy? Catherine of Aragon, Mrs. Bates, Jocasta...all suffering and unhappy. But I wept during her monologue. And the death of Morna was terribly tragic too. (She mentioned that her daughters died in a fire. To what was she referring?) She is truly an underrated actress.

Sex scene of Jamie Claire was tedious, not hot at all. I actually could live without sex scenes in the show, though I enjoyed season 1 a lot. The issue between them seemed contrived.

Glad Roger got a win! And he shared credit. Sweet!

My dream ending is if they somehow pass Bonnet off as Murtagh and get him executed and Murtagh gets to come out of hiding. 

 

[butterly17]

Ok.

I hate it but... something has been 'off' for me for several episodes...no one is having any Conversation that matter, it's frustrating.

I didn't get Jamie and Claire's fight at all.  It made no sense.. and didn't get resolved with mad sex.

 

 

 

 

[BitterApple]

This episode bored me to tears with the exception of the Murtaugh/Jocasta scene at the end. 

I was only half-heartedly watching, so maybe I missed a few things, but why did Jamie need to score Lucas in order to go after Bonnet? They came there on horseback, so they had transportation. Also, given Jamie's connections and the fact that Bonnet is known to be in Wilmington, do they really need Wylie to flush him out? 

Roger scoring a "W" was desperately needed. Poor guy gets no respect.

I 100% agree we need more Fergus. He's been one of my favorite characters since Paris, and I'd love to see the adult version get a meatier plotline. 

Everything else, meh. This is my least favorite episode so far.

[DoctorAtomic]

7 hours ago, nara said:

She is truly an underrated actress.

You know you're getting a stellar performance line by line whenever her name pops up in the credits. 

I had a good laugh when Roger was going on about the smoke and then stopped and Bree just went - uuh, aaaannd?

Edited March 22, 2020 by DoctorAtomic

[iMonrey]

Why is Jocasta marrying this Innes guy anyway? What am I missing here? I don't see what she's getting out of it. She clearly doesn't love him. Their brief scene together in this episode suggested she didn't even like him that much. She doesn't need his money, and she doesn't need an heir, so what's in this for her?

If I am to take it at face value that she simply doesn't want to be alone it's a pretty selfish light to paint her in. She said something to Murtagh  akin to "he'll devote his life to making me happy." Lady? You already have slaves. Innes deserves a woman who actually loves him back (I suppose . . . I mean, we don't even know him). Is Jocasta so needy for attention and adulation?

Quote

She gave Murtagh a chance to speak his mind before she accepted that crusty old dude's proposal so having him show up the night before the wedding to ask her to wait for him was not cool. 

That's another thing that bugs me, and it's essentially the same situation they keep throwing at Bree and Roger. Person #1 is fishing around for some kind of commitment or move, and Person #2 misinterprets this as a rejection and reacts in the opposite way Person #1 wants or expects which further alienates them and drives them further apart. It's Classic Misunderstanding 101 and it's been greatly over-used already on this show.

I mean, what do you expect to hear when you say "Oh by the way, so-and-so has asked me to marry him, and I haven't given him my answer yet, and what do you think of that?" That's fishing. 

[DoctorAtomic]

I don't like on tv that it's ok for women to smack men around. I mean, clearly, the french dandy was going to assault Claire and she had every right to defend herself, but when you're getting into an argument with your husband and your resource is to slap him, then gtfo. 

It was dumb af to gamble the wedding rings, but Jamie was right calling Claire on her claire-ing it up all the time too. 

54 minutes ago, iMonrey said:

Why is Jocasta marrying this Innes guy anyway?

She was fairly hell bent on marrying off Bree too. I think it's a high society thing. 

[BitterApple]

2 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

 

It was dumb af to gamble the wedding rings, but Jamie was right calling Claire on her claire-ing it up all the time too. 

 

Yeah, Claire always goes about things in the most ridiculous way possible. The logical course of action would've been to excuse herself from Wylie, tell Jamie about the Bonnet connection and formulate a rational plan. Instead, she uses the feminine wiles approach which promptly goes awry when her target tries to sexually assault her. Given that men are particularly rape-y around Claire you'd think she would've abandoned that tactic by now... 

Edited March 23, 2020 by BitterApple

[Scarlett45]

2 hours ago, BitterApple said:

Yeah, Claire always goes about things in the most ridiculous way possible. The logical course of action would've been to excuse herself from Wylie, tell Jamie about the Bonnet connection and formulate a rational plan. Instead, she uses the feminine wiles approach which promptly goes awry when her target tries to sexually assault her. Given that men are particularly rape-y around Claire you'd think she would've abandoned that tactic by now... 

Jaime was right- she thinks too much from the 20th century. (Jaime’s comment about still being a woman should’ve been a wake up call for her).
 

It was a social taboo for a woman to go off alone with ANY MAN EVER. (Besides her husband or other close relative.) For the record I’m not victim blaming, she had every right to kick his ass in defending herself and he was a creep who would’ve raped her. Had he not been a creep and just a guy who thought she wanted to cheat on her husband he wouldn’t have gotten rough with her when she said no. 
 

I don’t think men are particularly rapey around Claire, I think men are more sexually entitled in the 18th century than they are in the 20th and she breaks social taboos which in their minds means she’s “game” for whatever they want to do to her (best case) or she deserves it (worse case). It’s like guys in our time who think because he bought you dinner and you invited him in afterwards you have thus consented to any sexual activity he wants. In 2020 even the creepiest rapist don’t think a woman being out alone means she’s “asking to be raped”. (Of course no one asks to be raped, I am talking about the twisted mind games of the assailant). 

 

3 hours ago, iMonrey said:

Why is Jocasta marrying this Innes guy anyway? What am I missing here? I don't see what she's getting out of it. She clearly doesn't love him.

Companionship and social standing, some sex. He’s an educated, wealthy Scotsman (not as wealthy as her though) who wants her and will keep her entertained. There were social advantages to being married even for a rich widow like Jocasta. There were places she couldn’t go and business deals she couldn’t do because she didn’t have a penis, and she can’t send Ulysses- he’s a slave. I can imagine she would enjoy time with someone from her homeland who would look out for her business interests when she can’t (even if it doesn’t benefit him directly, there’s networking to be done). Also she doesn’t want to wait around and pine for Murtaugh IMO.  

[Cdh20]

4 hours ago, iMonrey said:

Why is Jocasta marrying this Innes guy anyway? What am I missing here? I don't see what she's getting out of it. She clearly doesn't love him. Their brief scene together in this episode suggested she didn't even like him that much. She doesn't need his money, and she doesn't need an heir, so what's in this for her?

 

Last year, 402, she talked with Jamie about needing a man to do business because in that time is isn’t acceptable for women to run things or make decisions  even though she is capable.  Remember she quickly put him in charge of the plantation.

[Cdh20]

5 hours ago, BitterApple said:

This episode bored me to tears with the exception of the Murtaugh/Jocasta scene at the end. 

I was only half-heartedly watching, so maybe I missed a few things, but why did Jamie need to score Lucas in order to go after Bonnet? They came there on horseback, so they had transportation. Also, given Jamie's connections and the fact that Bonnet is known to be in Wilmington, do they really need Wylie to flush him out? 

Roger scoring a "W" was desperately needed. Poor guy gets no respect.

I 100% agree we need more Fergus. He's been one of my favorite characters since Paris, and I'd love to see the adult version get a meatier plotline. 

Everything else, meh. This is my least favorite episode so far.

My hubby was bored to tears too- he said " We need some fighting & killing." Although I saw him look up from his phone when Jamie & Claire started to go at in the barn! I love Jamie & Claire in the afterglow moments-more of those please!

Jamie won the horse & then traded it back for an introduction to Bonnet!

Yay for Roger getting a WIN!

I love Fergus too!

I also liked hearing Jocasta's back story, as sad as it was. Last season I was wondering what happened to any children she'd had???

Edited March 23, 2020 by Cdh20
adding a thought

[DoctorAtomic]

20 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:

Jaime was right- she thinks too much from the 20th century. (Jaime’s comment about still being a woman should’ve been a wake up call for her)

She's still from the 1960s, so it's not like it was super great for women then either. Even if she is a doctor. They had a scene with the Frank season where they were with the faculty and even they were tooling on her. 

I certainly have zero issues with her shoving the guy off and she is in no way to blame for his actions.

To her credit, she's sharp enough to put 2+2 together and figure out they had a way to get at Bonnet, and to his credit, he didn't doubt her and agreed they should take action. 

22 hours ago, BitterApple said:

The logical course of action would've been to excuse herself from Wylie, tell Jamie about the Bonnet connection and formulate a rational plan.

This is entirely reasonable. But, it's Claire. I mean, the scenery is gorgeous but these characters aren't particularly multifaceted. You'd think in the past twenty years they'd both have a little growth. 

 

Edited March 23, 2020 by DoctorAtomic

[Scarlett45]

3 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

She's still from the 1960s, so it's not like it was super great for women then either. Even if she is a doctor. They had a scene with the Frank season where they were with the faculty and even they were tooling on her. 

I certainly have zero issues with her shoving the guy off and she is in no way to blame for his actions.

Of course she had every right to kick his ass. I wasn’t insinuating when didn’t have a right to defend herself, but the 1960s and 1770s are drastically different times for women and social rules about conduct between men and women. Claire tends to conveniently forget that. In season 1 it made sense (She was IN SHOCK) but when she made the conscious choice to go back to the past you’d think she would be a little more cautious in her plans. 

6 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

This is entirely reasonable. But, it's Claire. I mean, the scenery is gorgeous but these characters aren't particularly multifaceted. You'd think in the past twenty years they'd both have a little growth. 

TRUTH. You speak only the truth. 

[DoctorAtomic]

Yeah I was only saying that to cover my own ass. 

[zoey1996]

On 3/22/2020 at 11:01 AM, nara said:

Gods of casting, can you please give Maria Doyle Kennedy a role where she gets to be happy? Catherine of Aragon, Mrs. Bates, Jocasta...all suffering and unhappy. But I wept during her monologue. And the death of Morna was terribly tragic too. (She mentioned that her daughters died in a fire. To what was she referring?) She is truly an underrated actress.

Glad Roger got a win! And he shared credit. Sweet!

My dream ending is if they somehow pass Bonnet off as Murtagh and get him executed and Murtagh gets to come out of hiding. 

 

Jocasta said they were going to their daughters' estates (I think to be able for all to go elsewhere (America?)), but following the defeat at Culloden, the daughters and their families' estates were burned and all died in the fires.

Agree with Roger winning, and passing off Bonnet as Murtagh would be genius!

[Camera One]

I liked seeing Roger finally using some of his knowledge to advantage.  I actually thought Bree was going to use her engineering skills to invent some ingenious contraption to spread the smoke, but nope, just wave these sheets around, everyone!

It truly is bizarre how sidelined Fergus is.  Heck, it seems like Marsali gets more to work with.  

That was a really good scene between Murtagh and Joscasta.  I haven't really liked either character much, but the flashback was quite sad.  The show never did truly show us the longer-term consequences of the loss at Culloden.  Murtagh was a favorite character of mine in Season 1-2, but I don't buy or sympathesize with this Regulator cause, and I had lost much of my feeling for him until this episode.  

Bonnet told the Hobbit actor about his illegitimate child?  Why would he?  I hope Bonnet dies soon.

I couldn't really remember Wylie, and as some have said above, I don't get why they need Wylie to get to Bonnet.  He's in Wilmington, has a ship, so just track him and jump him when he's alone.  Even if Claire hadn't talked to Wylie, John Grey would have already confirmed Bonnet being in Wilmington and injuring that guy.  

And at the end of the day, if Jaime had just told Murtagh to kill Bonnet outright, then the psycho rapist wouldn't be free to roam right now.  

[gingerella]

In no particular order:

The opening scene grabbed my attention immediately! And then the screen told me we were in Scotland just post-Culloden and I realized why I already loved this scene, we're back in bonny ol Scotland again, yeah! Loved learning more about Jocasta's back story and hope we learn more. So was it Hector that accidentally shot his own daughter then, or was it the coach driver? I was confused in all the commotion. How gutwrenching to see your child killed accidentally and then have to leave her body lying on the roadside with the very people who caused the death. That's a tough spot, but there was nothing more to be done, they had to run away. And now we understand how River Run was funded, on stolen French gold meant for the Stuart Rebellion. Wow. So King Louis DID send gold to that moronic cousin of his, and it did arrive, but it was too late! And apparently it was available for stealing...I wonder where the rest of it went, and if we'll learn about that too. Anyway, back to Jocasta, she lost all her children in the aftermath of Culloden, but we never met her back then did we? I know Jenny got letters from her when they were in the Colonies and Jamie was living in the cave I think. But I wonder why we never met her before Culloden, it seems like she wouldn't be living too far from either Leoch or Lallybroch or anywhere else that Jamie happened to be roaming around the Highlands.

I enjoyed seeing Roger being right about something for once, and for being able to save the day and gain trust and respect from the settlers on Fraser's Ridge. But the locust CGI was bad as usual. CGI never looks real to me, like, ever.

'I Shine, Not Burn'. Loved that family motto and thought the gift of it on a lavender sache to to calm the bride's nerves was actually a lovely gesture and made me not dislike old Innis too much. I think he wants companionship and Jocasta needs a man of high standing to do her business bidding when a woman cannot do so themselves. She's a smart cookie, the shrewd side of the MacKenzie's, like her sister Ellen and how she managed to end up marrying a man she loved. The boys in that family, well Dougal was an asshole most of the time, and Colum was smart I suppose. Jamie is a mix of both I think - he can be smart but a lot of the time his execution of idea misses the mark and people get hurt.

Jocasta deeds River Run to Gemmy...and the little weasel who runs and tells Bonnet is who now? I cannot remember his name though we've seen him before. Why does he know that Gemmy is Bonnet's kid?!?

Wiley, I forgot who he is, but no matter, he's a priggish asshole, case closed. And yet AGAIN, Claire goes off with a creepster into a dark stable, ALONE, and she thinks nothing bad will come of that?! She hasn't learned much since she left, and returned 20 years later, has she? Still doing stupid things and putting herself and others at risk for it.  And Jamie's whole 'let me bet Frank's ring on a game of whist' was AGAIN a stupid Jamie move, even though he apparently won. It was still a dumb move. What did all that nonsense even get them? NOTHING. Claire had already learned that Bonnet was running a smuggling ring out of Wilmington. All the needed to do was tell Murtagh to get some men and find Bonnet there and kill him. Easy peasy, DONE. But nope! They cook up a hairbrained scheme to what? To get Wiley, who is not exactly reliable, to make an introduction for them. I guess they thought they'd meet him alone and AHA! Kill him then, but more likely he'd have come with protection and then what kids? He knows you both on site. Stupid plan. Stupid game. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

The wig maker of this show should be fired post haste. Terrible, awful, no good wigs on everyone!

Lord John, always nice to see him but what is he actually doing there still? He was checking on some land or something that either his wife or his son owns, yes? So is he staying there or what? Why not tell us Show? It's like the showrunners expect us to just be happy with a LJ sighting but without any reasoning as to why he's still in the Colonies. I know, Jamie, but still...

Murtagh! At first I was like, MURTAGH, YEAH! But after his stupid move with Jocasta on the eve of her wedding to Innis he lost my admiration. What a fucking tool. She gave you the option to have her always when you laid with her in that lean to at Brianna and Roger's wedding, but instead you were a stubborn ass weren't you? Jocasta was correct, a man like Murtagh would be like living with Hector, another man who made her lose her only living daughter. That's not what she wanted anymore. She wanted security and companionship, and someone she could use to help her business transactions. Murtagh would never be any of that. He had nothing. He would never be happy living at River Run. And he's too much of a hot head to ever be a help with her business. So yeah, you blew it Murtagh. I lerved you once, but you've lost me now dude.

The angry stable sex was like a bad farce. These two can't pull that off anymore, it felt ridiculous to me, quite honestly. And Jamie me lad, how does one have immediate sex without so much as bothering to unlace his breeks? I'd like to know. Does he have magical pants that fall down when Claire's aroused?

All in all, this was a silly episode for me. I thought we were on a roll but I'm not sure now, alas.

[SassAndSnacks]

On 2/20/2022 at 3:10 PM, gingerella said:

So was it Hector that accidentally shot his own daughter then, or was it the coach driver?

Hector

On 2/20/2022 at 3:10 PM, gingerella said:

and the little weasel who runs and tells Bonnet is who now?

Gerald Forbes (not to be confused with Gerald Ford...it IS President's Day in the US, afterall).  Brianna shunned him at River Run during the dinner party with all of the suitors.  Auntie Jo was trying to set her up with one of the guests.  Forbes was about to propose when Bri popped in with Lord John after faux blackmailing him to pretend to be engaged to her.  You know, the Season 4 shenanigans that were well...not so great.

On 2/20/2022 at 3:10 PM, gingerella said:

They cook up a hairbrained scheme to what?

 Right.  Season 2 in Paris taught us that Claire and Jamie, while having many talents, aren't so great at the intrigues. Alas, we know they learn nothing from their past mistakes.

On 2/20/2022 at 3:10 PM, gingerella said:

So yeah, you blew it Murtagh. I lerved you once, but you've lost me now dude.

Agree.  But when he said, "The world may change, but I willna change" he almost had me.  Almost.  Then, I remembered that he's kinda changed.  

On 2/20/2022 at 3:10 PM, gingerella said:

The angry stable sex was like a bad farce.

Oh, hell's bells.  Hate it.  I will break the no book talk rules to say that this particular scene in the books...um...ahem...  This scene in the show, barf.  Stupid.  Bad.  DG herself has been super critical of how this all played out in the screen.  It is so very cringe. 

[mythoughtis]

Forbes, quite the weasel.  Does he think Bonnet  is somehow going to get River Run?   
 

I have a problem with Claire being so attached to Frank’s  ring that she continues  to wear it several years after his death.    And decades after they quit sleeping together, and with him asking for a divorce prior to his death.   Not only wears it but acts as if it’s a fate worse than death to take it off.  
As a reminder, she was the one that told Jaime they didn’t need to replace the ring HE gave her after Bonnet stole it.    She was content to just wear Frank’s ring and not his. 

Edited August 31, 2022 by mythoughtis

[DoctorAtomic]

I always thought there was some guilt and some respect there. Frank raised a child his wife had from someone else and did a great job. She's with Jamie. They can get another ring. 

[Scarlett45]

On 8/31/2022 at 3:17 PM, DoctorAtomic said:

I always thought there was some guilt and some respect there. Frank raised a child his wife had from someone else and did a great job. She's with Jamie. They can get another ring. 

Yes I agree. Although Frank & Claire had a complicated relationship to say the least, he was her partner and co-parent.
 

He’s now gone, and he never got to grow old, see Bree have children, OR be with a woman that loved him the way Claire loved Jamie. I get why she’s attached to the ring. 

[DoctorAtomic]

21 minutes ago, Scarlett45 said:

Although Frank & Claire had a complicated relationship to say the least, he was her partner and co-parent.

I would have liked the show to have shown us some more of that. Frank got short shrift when Claire first returned. He wasn't a slouch. You'd think there could have been a couple of episodes involving a Harvard professor of history within the context of the show. 

[Noneofyourbusiness]

11 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:

OR be with a woman that loved him the way Claire loved Jamie.

Although the woman he was with might have.

[Scarlett45]

1 hour ago, Noneofyourbusiness said:

Although the woman he was with might have.

She may have loved him, but she was always the woman “on the side”. When you’re the person on the side you are aware that you aren’t the priority. I’m sure that affects the intimacy and emotional support between people. 

[gingerella]

6 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:

She may have loved him, but she was always the woman “on the side”. When you’re the person on the side you are aware that you aren’t the priority. I’m sure that affects the intimacy and emotional support between people. 

I've always felt that IF Claire had made Frank believe she could make it work and fall back in love with him, he'd have left the side piece in a heartbeat. He loved Claire deeply and even though he was deeply flawed and very jealous of Jamie - and who can blame him, I mean, your wife's lover is from 200 years ago, WTF?!? - I think he'd have given her another chance if she made the effort. The downfall for them, IMO, was that Frank refused to allow Claire grieve for, or talk about Jamie. So she never could heal and thus Frank thwarted the very thing he desired most, being with Claire and having her love him again.

[Scarlett45]

1 minute ago, gingerella said:

I've always felt that IF Claire had made Frank believe she could make it work and fall back in love with him, he'd have left the side piece in a heartbeat. He loved Claire deeply and even though he was deeply flawed and very jealous of Jamie - and who can blame him, I mean, your wife's lover is from 200 years ago, WTF?!? - I think he'd have given her another chance if she made the effort. The downfall for them, IMO, was that Frank refused to allow Claire grieve for, or talk about Jamie. So she never could heal and thus Frank thwarted the very thing he desired most, being with Claire and having her love him again.

Yes I agree with that. Claire was Frank's first choice, and she wasn't his. Of course in many loving marriages that works out (especially when one person's first choice is deceased!) But I cannot blame Frank or Claire either too much for this situation. If Jamie had been a man Claire had loved who died in the war (that she served with while she and Frank were a part), I think Frank could've understood and they would've been in a better place. But Frank (rightfully) thought Claire was mentally unstable and had a break down around whomever this "Jamie Fraser" was so he didn't get it. By the time Frank believed Claire, it was too late. Also Frank did love the family he had with Claire, he loved Brianna, Claire loved having him co-parent with her.......it was a mess emotionally for a lot of reasons.