S07.E07: A Practical Guide for Time-Travellers

[Athena]

Quote

Jamie prepares to face British forces in battle. Roger and Brianna question Buck MacKenzie's intentions in the 20th century. William fights in the First Battle of Saratoga.

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.

[Hanahope]

Ok, so Jamie participated in the Battle of Saratoga (or at least one battle) and was possibly injured.  i'm sure he can't be dead yet.  Wasn't he supposed to hang back with the long range riflemen?  it must be a little thrilling for Claire to experience real life history.

William's friend was killed, which i'm sure made him even more anti-colonist.  going to make for an even bigger conflict when he eventually meets up with Jamie (because that has to happen).

And we confirm the knucklevee is Buck MacKenzie, who had the bad luck to have a gem in his ring.  we never got the answer to Roger's question as to what he was thinking about when he was at the stones, that might explain how on earth he came to 1980.  but looks like he doesn't live much further in 1788, so either he returns there and killed, or he comes back later with Roger (who i guess must now take a whole bunch of gems with him to rescue Jem - ooo, would the stones burn up more gems than the number of people, or just take what is needed so one can take 'return gems' with them for the first trip?)

Rob all of a sudden became even more of an antagonist to Bree and Roger, suddenly thinking Roger's "sci-fi story" was real, and I guess Roger included such details as to needing gems to go through the stones.  so, why did he take Jem through the stones?  if Rob was short on money or something like that, why is he wasting gems? i got he's divorced, probably must pay something to ex-wife, i confess i miss or missunderstand dialogue sometimes with the accents (at least i can understand Bree).  What is Rob's  plan?  to hide out in 1780 Scotland?  does Rob really think he can survive there?  what, he's going to track down his family and explain things?  and how would Rob know he can travel?  maybe he heard family stories and noticed how similar they were to Roger's story so that's why he now thinks Roger's "sci fi story" is real?  did i miss more dialogue than i thought?

did roger write about the gold in his story?  that would be stupid when they don't know it really exists.  what, Rob thinks he's going to get Jem to tell him where it is, then he's going to find a ship to take him to NC, find the gold, and come back?  in the middle of the Revolutionary War?  haha, good luck dude.

but the plot takes Roger and Buck back to 1780.  will they be conscripted by the Brits? would Rob?  that would be interesting.  Does Buck find Morag again?  Buck sure seemed to accept time travel pretty well for a 18th century man, but i guess one has to believe their own eyes.  and i guess as a lawyer, he was more educated than most of that time.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mythoughtis]

It always amazes me that the British lined up to face the Americans and just stood there so they could be perfect targets.  So civilized and so dumb.  
 

so who is Rob related to that he can go through the stones?  

Edited July 28, 2023 by mythoughtis

[Hanahope]

8 minutes ago, mythoughtis said:

It always amazes me that the British lined up to face the Americans and just stood there so they could be perfect targets.  So civilized and so dumb.  

and it bright red too!  At least the germans wore blue.

9 minutes ago, mythoughtis said:

so who is Rob related to that he can go through the stones?  

oh, maybe he's related to Gellis' family (her original family from the 1970s - not the Mackenzies of the 1700s) and that's where he also heard stories about traveling through the stones?

[CheckItOutlander]

I did not need that much of my precious Outlander time dedicated to “In the Air Tonight” drum solo sex with Roger and Bree. Really. I didn’t.

Liked the Buck in the future stuff. Scared about the Jem somewhere else/sacrifice stuff. And then… Jamie and William on the same battlefield. Noooooo! 

Can’t believe there’s only one episode left until 2024. 

Edited July 29, 2023 by CheckItOutlander

[Jodithgrace]

Whether or not one likes the opening theme sung by Sinaid O’Conner (I do, personally) I’m surprised that there wasn’t an “In Memoriam” notice in the credits. 
 

Lots of big stakes in tonight’s episode, Jem missing in the stones, a traveler from the past…first time we’ve seen one of them, and Jamie looking downright dead at the very end, though I suspect he isn’t. 
 

Poor William. He wanted to go to war, and now he has. Not quite what he imagined, I don’t think. 

[DoctorAtomic]

Sure, now they show the hanging in the previouslies. They could have done that last week. I get they wanted that cold opening to introduce him. I did like the dissolve of Claire writing the letter and Bree reading it. And they pointed out that they're staying in the camper, and not the house yet. Good also to show that the gem in the ring was burnt. 

I don't want to be overly much, but, sadly, this is a song of the lass who is gone.

I liked how Jamie snipped at the book being made poorly. 

I have to give Rankin credit; his complete unraveling the entire time was funny at the dinner.

I would have thought easier for Roger to bring Buck to school; to teach *language*, than Bree bringing him to work. Although, he might be good security. 

I was going to call out Phil Collins, but I had no idea the song came out in 1980. I remember it first from Miami Vice. 

You'd think the time it takes to reload the rifles that there would still be value in archers. I never got that. 

11 hours ago, Hanahope said:

that would be stupid when they don't know it really exists.  what, Rob thinks he's going to get Jem to tell him where it is, then he's going to find a ship to take him to NC, find the gold, and come back?  in the middle of the Revolutionary War?  haha, good luck dude.

I think that's probably the plan there. Maybe Rob had a couple of rings. Grab Jem and the gems (ha!) and go through. Clearly, this isn't the kind of show that's going to kill a child. Jem is the only one that knows where the gold is. Which, stands to reason, as you said, how Rob knew he could travel. Although everyone seems to now. 

9 hours ago, Hanahope said:

oh, maybe he's related to Gellis' family (her original family from the 1970s - not the Mackenzies of the 1700s) and that's where he also heard stories about traveling through the stones?

The show is what it is, but they're in rural Scotland, so it's not outside of reason that Gellis had an extended family; she was from the 60s, but you think maybe 100+ years or so of a couple of towns in the area. There's a lot of marriages but everyone is cousins. He could have heard of stories. There could be a lot them that can travel. I'm not really going to call ooc on the show on that. 

2 hours ago, CheckItOutlander said:

I did not need that much of my precious Outlander time dedicated to “In the Air Tonight” drum solo sex with Roger and Bree. Really. I didn’t.

You kind of did though. How many people you think did it to Phil Collins in the 80s? All of them. 

I don't think Jamie is dead either, again, because it's just not that kind of show. Wounded? Sure. He's also 60 years old and in the middle of one of the most pivotal battles of the Revolution. He's got to be dehydrated. What I do call ooc on is a veteran, probably one of ten, of Culloden, is reduced to a low rank of actually being on the battlefield. The show even showed at Ticonderoga that he should be an aide-de-camp to the general, if not a Lt. General himself. That's just patently absurd. Especially since he's got intelligence via Claire that no one else has. 

Edited July 29, 2023 by DoctorAtomic

[nara]

I guessed that Jemmy would travel back but thought Rob would take the boys to the tunnel for a fun, secret outing and lose Jemmy that way.
 

I wonder how far back in time he’s trying to go? I had assumed to some time before he got divorced but I guess it has to be the 18th century.

I like how Buck now has Roger’s back and told him about the hot-eye. I think I’m going to use that expression in real life.

Glad William got acquainted with the reality of war—it’s not all honor and victory. It should make him wiser going forward.

[DoctorAtomic]

I still think William defects. 

[Trillian]

12 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I was going to call out Phil Collins, but I had no idea the song came out in 1980. I remember it first from Miami Vice. 

I came here to do the same thing but read through the posts first. According to Wikipedia (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_Air_Tonight) and every other source I could quickly find online, it wasn’t released until 1981. January 1981, but still 1981. So now Phil Collins is a time traveller as well.  

[Glade]

I really wasn't expecting Buck to be given such a sympathetic arc, or for Rob to wind up a kidnapping time traveler.  I wonder what his motive is; I can understand just wanting to time travel, but taking Jemmy is bizzare.  I don't buy that it's to find the gold; the entire point of J/C writing to Roger and Bri about it in the letters is that the gold is as far as we know still hidden in the cave in present time, so all you have to do is fly to NC and hike in the woods to look for it, going back in time and sailing for a war zone to do that is ludicrous.  But hopefully we will learn more about who Rob is and what he is after.  I'd say it involves something in Scotland, not America.

It's interesting that Bri didn't point out, that she is also related to Buck via Jaimie, since Dougal is his uncle and Buck is Dougal's son or grandson or something?  But maybe Buck doesn't know that, since he didn't react to hearing Geillis's name either.  It's probably best to avoid that subject, given that her parents killed both Dougal and Geillis, anyway. 

[Cosmocrush]

I knew the minute Roger moved the box of letters to a prominent position on his desk and then left Rob alone in the study that Rob would look at them and Roger's notebook on everything.  I didn't expect him to travel. 

On 7/28/2023 at 8:11 AM, Hanahope said:

Rob all of a sudden became even more of an antagonist to Bree and Roger, suddenly thinking Roger's "sci-fi story" was real, and I guess Roger included such details as to needing gems to go through the stones.  so, why did he take Jem through the stones?

Roger seemed to think he took Jemmy because Gellis thought she needed a human sacrifice to go through the stones.   But I think it probably has more to do with 1) Jemmy being able to travel, 2) Jemmy being easy to persuade to go and finally, 3) the gold.  

I am used to waving off the mistakes but seriously, what kind of parent let's their child stay over without talking to the parent?????  Sheesh.  

Edited July 29, 2023 by Cosmocrush

[DoctorAtomic]

I think we're all ruling out Jemmy was sacrificed to go through the stones. There wasn't a body there; we did see Gellis' husband when she went through iirc. The logical conclusion is the gold because Jem is the only person that knows where it is. Why not fly there? He said he didn't have much money due to the divorce, and I'd think Jem is smart enough to know to yell if they were at the airport. 

Also the guy ain't right in the head anyway. 

Maybe he thinks Jamie is in Scotland at that point in time and intends to force him to take him to the gold. He could think Jamie might have moved it since the letter was written. 

[BitterApple]

5 hours ago, Cosmocrush said:

I knew the minute Roger moved the box of letters to a prominent position on his desk and then left Rob alone in the study that Rob would look at them and Roger's notebook on everything.  I didn't expect him to travel. 

I am used to waving off the mistakes but seriously, what kind of parent let's their child stay over without talking to the parent?????  Sheesh.  

I face-palmed that so hard. Roger's guard should've already been up after Rob read the journal, but nope, let's just leave this guy alone in an office surrounded by a treasure trove of valuable personal information. 🥴

Also agree with your second point. I grew up in the 80s and things were way more loosey-goosey in terms of child safety, but even back then red flags would've gone up at an uncle arranging a children's sleepover. I feel like so much of Roger and Bree's storyline is them being idiots so the plot can happen. 

I was a bit surprised to see Buck was a lawyer. He didn't come across as particularly well-educated during his first appearance. I did think the scene of him watching tv with the kids was really cute, especially Mandy combing his beard. 

The Phil Collins sex scene was so unbelievably cringe. I can't erase it from my mind fast enough. 

I'm assuming the next episode will fill in the blanks a bit in terms of Rob's family history and what he's after in the 18th century. 

[Noneofyourbusiness]

On 7/28/2023 at 11:11 AM, Hanahope said:

And we confirm the knucklevee is Buck MacKenzie, who had the bad luck to have a gem in his ring.  we never got the answer to Roger's question as to what he was thinking about when he was at the stones, that might explain how on earth he came to 1980.

Rob all of a sudden became even more of an antagonist to Bree and Roger, suddenly thinking Roger's "sci-fi story" was real, and I guess Roger included such details as to needing gems to go through the stones.  so, why did he take Jem through the stones?  if Rob was short on money or something like that, why is he wasting gems? i got he's divorced, probably must pay something to ex-wife, i confess i miss or missunderstand dialogue sometimes with the accents (at least i can understand Bree).  What is Rob's  plan?  to hide out in 1780 Scotland?  does Rob really think he can survive there?  what, he's going to track down his family and explain things?  and how would Rob know he can travel?  maybe he heard family stories and noticed how similar they were to Roger's story so that's why he now thinks Roger's "sci fi story" is real?  did i miss more dialogue than i thought?

Bree's question, but yes, Buck's non-answer was suspicious unless that's a red herring.

As Roger said to Buck in the car, I'm pretty sure Rob always gave the story credence and just pretended to think it was science fiction.

If his ex-wife's family has money and he doesn't, it would be odd for him to pay alimony.

If Rob *could* travel, he might know it from having heard buzzing around the stones and/or the portal in the dam tunnel.

On 7/28/2023 at 12:56 PM, Hanahope said:

oh, maybe he's related to Gellis' family (her original family from the 1970s - not the Mackenzies of the 1700s) and that's where he also heard stories about traveling through the stones?

Related or not, Rob was very interested in Roger's Gaelic class and the Gaelic hymnals, and Geillis was in a Scottish Nationalist group, so them knowing each other isn't out of the question.

21 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I liked how Jamie snipped at the book being made poorly.

Clearly, this isn't the kind of show that's going to kill a child.

He could have heard of stories.

Nice to be reminded that Jamie was a printer.

Although the show did have a child pushed off a ship by Stephen Bonnet.

That, too. It has been mentioned before that there are old stories about time travelers.

7 hours ago, Glade said:

It's interesting that Bri didn't point out, that she is also related to Buck via Jaimie, since Dougal is his uncle and Buck is Dougal's son or grandson or something?  But maybe Buck doesn't know that, since he didn't react to hearing Geillis's name either.  It's probably best to avoid that subject, given that her parents killed both Dougal and Geillis, anyway. 

Buck is Dougal and Geillis's son, the one she was spared being executed for witchcraft because she was pregnant with. He was given to MacKenzie cousins to raise after he was born. Those are the William John MacKenzie and Sarah Innes above his name on the family tree. He hasn't indicated knowing his birth parentage. Though there must be some record somewhere, given that Claire found out in her researches in Season 2 and told Roger about it.

[DoctorAtomic]

30 minutes ago, BitterApple said:

I feel like so much of Roger and Bree's storyline is them being idiots so the plot can happen.

I do like the show; I don't hate watch. Largely, the conversation here enhances the viewing experience. However, there's a *lot* that happens because plot. 

39 minutes ago, BitterApple said:

I was a bit surprised to see Buck was a lawyer. He didn't come across as particularly well-educated during his first appearance.

I agree, but I also think he's quite shrewd. He noticed the 'hot eye' right away. Just an eye for detail, knowing people, and a good work ethic is really most of the job. 

[mythoughtis]

1 hour ago, BitterApple said:

but even back then red flags would've gone up at an uncle arranging a children's sleepover. I feel like so much of Roger and Bree's storyline is them being idiots

Especially a person  that Bree isn’t even close to because of what happened her first day.  Roger and Bree went from not liking him to giving him their son for the night in the blink of an eye.  They are clueless even after everything they saw when they went back in time. 
 

The show needs to explain how Rob thinks he’s going to get away with this if he’s returning to the present day at some point.  Even if he brings Jem back, they aren’t likely going to return 5 minutes after they left - especially since Roger and Buck were several hours behind them getting to the stones and found only a scarf.  So he’s going to have to deal with the consequences at some  point 

[nara]

If I recall correctly, there were some Camerons that tried to raid our friends right  after the Jamie / Claire wedding, so I wonder if Rob is trying to settle the score with the McKs. Or perhaps he is trying to save Geillis. 

Or maybe he is going to France to ensure his ex’s family doesn’t become rich. Maybe they made their wealth by selling supplies to the “Americans”.

[GHScorpiosRule]

14 hours ago, Noneofyourbusiness said:

Buck is Dougal and Geillis's son, the one she was spared being executed for witchcraft because she was pregnant with. He was given to MacKenzie cousins to raise after he was born. Those are the William John MacKenzie and Sarah Innes above his name on the family tree. He hasn't indicated knowing his birth parentage. Though there must be some record somewhere, given that Claire found out in her researches in Season 2 and told Roger about it.

Colum told Claire at the end of season two that Geillis’s baby survived. And in the finale, Claire told Roger and a snotty Brianna about how he was related to the MacKenzies, after she researched his genealogy when he told her the Reverend Wakefield had adopted him, but that his parents were MacKenzies.

I’ve just finished rewatching so my memory was refreshed.

Edited July 30, 2023 by GHScorpiosRule

[Lola82]

14 hours ago, BitterApple said:

I face-palmed that so hard. Roger's guard should've already been up after Rob read the journal, but nope, let's just leave this guy alone in an office surrounded by a treasure trove of valuable personal information. 🥴

Also agree with your second point. I grew up in the 80s and things were way more loosey-goosey in terms of child safety, but even back then red flags would've gone up at an uncle arranging a children's sleepover. I feel like so much of Roger and Bree's storyline is them being idiots so the plot can happen. I

It drives me crazy how casual they are with this secret, personal information. How hard is it to put a lock on that chest? Also, it made me nervous to see the fireplace so close to the desk, I was half-expecting those letters to end up being burnt. And I’m still having a hard time believing they wouldn’t read through all the letters at once, their parents are in the middle of a war, there’s no curiosity to see how/if they make it out?!

It would be hilarious if Rob gets killed right away in the 1700’s for being some kind of witch (warlock?). At the very least, it would be a nice change of pace to see a time traveler not know how to adapt to a different century. 

[Noneofyourbusiness]

14 hours ago, nara said:

If I recall correctly, there were some Camerons that tried to raid our friends right  after the Jamie / Claire wedding, so I wonder if Rob is trying to settle the score with the McKs. Or perhaps he is trying to save Geillis.

Those were MacDonalds. Sworn enemies of the MacKenzies.

13 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Colum told Claire at the end of season two that Geillis’s baby survived. And in the finale, Claire told Roger and a snotty Brianna about how he was related to the MacKenzies, after she researched his genealogy when he told her the Reverend Wakefield had adopted him, but that his parents were MacKenzies.

I’ve just finished rewatching so my memory was refreshed.

And Geillis told Claire about it in Season 3. But it's unclear how Claire found out in Season 2 that Buck was Dougal and Geillis's son when it was a closed adoption, so to speak.

Edited July 30, 2023 by Noneofyourbusiness

[iMonrey]

If Rob took Jemmy with him because he's after the gold, that seems like a huge long shot on his part. Getting from Scotland to North Caroline in the 1770s is going to be pretty tough. Especially with a little kid in tow. I wonder if maybe Rob discovered a way to time travel by using another traveler. In other words, even if you yourself do not possess the time traveling gene, maybe there's a way to time travel if you are with a time traveler. 

I still don't care about William.

[Noneofyourbusiness]

Now imagine if instead of Blake's 7 they had been watching a show with time travel, like Doctor Who. Diana Galbadon named Outlander's Jamie after Doctor Who's Jamie, after all.

[andidante]

17 hours ago, BitterApple said:

The Phil Collins sex scene was so unbelievably cringe. I can't erase it from my mind fast enough. 

 

I fast forwarded through it! LOL

[Eureka]

On 7/29/2023 at 3:29 AM, WatcherUatl10 said:

LOL! I said that TO the TV, immediately reminisced and didn't pay attention to the rest of the episode.

I was focusing on the fact that my grandparents had those same yellow floral 70s sheets. 😆

[DoctorAtomic]

Knowing this show, next week, they're just going to be in North Carolina. 

They mentioned the wife was French, so I suppose he could be going back to kill them off, but that way outside the main plot. 

[CarpeFelis]

On 7/29/2023 at 8:41 AM, Trillian said:

I came here to do the same thing but read through the posts first. According to Wikipedia (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_Air_Tonight) and every other source I could quickly find online, it wasn’t released until 1981. January 1981, but still 1981. So now Phil Collins is a time traveller as well.  

Did I miss something somewhere? How do we know exactly what year Roger and Bree are in?

[mythoughtis]

It’s possible that Bree’s question to Buck about his thoughts while touching the stone is important- or it’s just something that an experienced time traveler would be curious about. 
Buck may or may not know the answer to the question. If he didn’t intend to travel, any thoughts he had at the time may have been forgotten due to the ‘what the what just happened’ effect.  I’m not sure Claire ever said what she was thinking  about that first time. She had been discussing BJR with Frank earlier, but she supposedly drove to the stones to collect flowers.  She was also probably curious about the buzzing.  Our assumption is that she was directed to BJR ‘s location 203( is that right?) years in the past.

Buck could  have been simply thinking about his unknown future descendants and just ended up 203 years later where one was. 

[Ziggy]

On 7/29/2023 at 10:41 AM, Trillian said:

I came here to do the same thing but read through the posts first. According to Wikipedia (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_Air_Tonight) and every other source I could quickly find online, it wasn’t released until 1981. January 1981, but still 1981. So now Phil Collins is a time traveller as well.  

 

10 hours ago, CarpeFelis said:

Did I miss something somewhere? How do we know exactly what year Roger and Bree are in?

At the beginning of Episode 4, as Roger’s driving through the arch, it says, “Lallybroch 1980.” 

I think it’s fair to say it could be 1981 by now.

[Noneofyourbusiness]

3 hours ago, mythoughtis said:

Our assumption is that she was directed to BJR ‘s location 203( is that right?) years in the past.

Yes, from 1946 to 1743.

[sashabear21]

The In the Air Tonight scene was too long and little uncomfortable (plus I really dislike that song), but I gotta give mad props to Brianna because I’d have a hot eye on Roger in that kilt too! 

[greekmom]

This episode made no sense.

I actually FF through the past scenes. 

The whole Rob Cameron thing doesn't make sense.  First, let's say he believes in the time travel.  What makes him think that he can pass through the stones? He doesn't have that special spark - right!? Ok, let's say he does, he is going to travel from Scotland to America during the war to get to the cave that the gold is buried.

Wouldn't a better plan be to kidnap Jem and go to America in the present to find the cave? No one has discovered the gold otherwise it would have been in the news.  Or at least travel to America in the present and go to the stones there. Again, if he can travel through time.

Bree and Roger doing it to the Air Tonight wasn't all that sexy. But Roger in the kilt was.

Buck getting use to 1981 is interesting.

[Cdh20]

15 hours ago, mythoughtis said:

It’s possible that Bree’s question to Buck about his thoughts while touching the stone is important- or it’s just something that an experienced time traveler would be curious about. 
Buck may or may not know the answer to the question. If he didn’t intend to travel, any thoughts he had at the time may have been forgotten due to the ‘what the what just happened’ effect.  I’m not sure Claire ever said what she was thinking  about that first time. She had been discussing BJR with Frank earlier, but she supposedly drove to the stones to collect flowers.  She was also probably curious about the buzzing.  Our assumption is that she was directed to BJR ‘s location 203( is that right?) years in the past.

Buck could  have been simply thinking about his unknown future descendants and just ended up 203 years later where one was. 

It’s 202 years for most people ( Claire, Bree, Roger) but not Geillis.

[Linderhill]

On 7/30/2023 at 1:17 PM, andidante said:

I fast forwarded through it! LOL

I did too!

[areca]

On 7/28/2023 at 10:40 PM, DoctorAtomic said:

You'd think the time it takes to reload the rifles that there would still be value in archers. I never got that. 

The military of the time usually had 3 men working every rifle, though it's not depicted properly in the show.  The shooter would shoot, and then drop the gun.  The middle man would hand it back to the powder men who were loading as fast as they could while the middle man picked up the reloaded one they'd primed and get it to the shooter.  Sometimes they only used 2 and the back guy did double duty. It kind of worked like a bucket line for fires back in the day.

Edited August 1, 2023 by areca

[DoctorAtomic]

I still could probably get off 5 arrows in that time, and I'd be further than the range of the guns though. 

[steph369]

On 7/28/2023 at 10:40 PM, DoctorAtomic said:

You kind of did though. How many people you think did it to Phil Collins in the 80s? All of them. 

Nope, did not need the scene. I’d rather have seen all those people from the 80’s go at it than Bree. Even that she can’t act out well. 

 

Edited August 3, 2023 by steph369

[Shermie]

I’m just so tired of this American nonsense. First it was them homesteading, big deal, like we haven’t seen that many times before. Now it’s an American war, again, Americans with guns, shooting stuff, making war; again, like that hasn’t happened ad nauseam.

A big draw of this show was the Scottish/British history, the highlands, the accents. Moving them to America was a huge mistake by the author because it’s such a yawn. I keep waiting for them to get back to Scotland, but time and again they are foiled. Why the author thought this was a positive move is beyond me.

As for the the time travel, well, everything that’s changed in the past affects the present. But this show never admits that.

The episode itself? Not enough Claire and Jamie, who are becoming bit characters in their own show.

[GHScorpiosRule]

On 7/30/2023 at 12:09 AM, nara said:

 

If I recall correctly, there were some Camerons that tried to raid our friends right  after the Jamie / Claire wedding

 

 

On 7/30/2023 at 12:11 PM, Noneofyourbusiness said:

Those were MacDonalds. Sworn enemies of the MacKenzies.

No. It was the Grants. I’m rewatching season one again and am currently watching this episode where it’s stated it was the Grants who raided.

[DoctorAtomic]

13 hours ago, Shermie said:

I’m just so tired of this American nonsense. First it was them homesteading, big deal, like we haven’t seen that many times before. Now it’s an American war, again, Americans with guns, shooting stuff, making war; again, like that hasn’t happened ad nauseam.

I don't mind that they went to America, but it's maybe not lazy, but derivative, that they're in the northern thick of the revolution. I thought it would have been far more interesting had they remained in the south because you just don't see anything on tv from that pov. 

13 hours ago, Shermie said:

As for the the time travel, well, everything that’s changed in the past affects the present. But this show never admits that.

Not exactly. The first two seasons showed that they couldn't affect what's happened already. They couldn't avoid Culloden. Jamie isn't concerned that America isn't going to lose the Revolution. That's why is kind of ridiculous that he's in the thick of battle and maybe not being a printer in Wilmington or a southern rebel spy. 

 

 

[ch1]

I always thought it was silly that they settled in the colonies at all with the knowledge of what was to come.  I mean they just spent 20 years separated thanks to war and then go ahead and plop themselves right in the middle of another one.  

Maybe a trip back to Paris will be next on their list.  

 

 

[GHScorpiosRule]

9 minutes ago, ch1 said:

I always thought it was silly that they settled in the colonies at all with the knowledge of what was to come.  I mean they just spent 20 years separated thanks to war and then go ahead and plop themselves right in the middle of another one.  

Maybe a trip back to Paris will be next on their list.  

 

 

Well, they didn't intentionally head to The Colonies. They got caught up in that hurricane? Squall? in the West Indies, and ended up in Georgia at the end of season three.

But I agree. I much prefer the Scotland location, because...Highlands!

[Hanahope]

2 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

Quote

As for the the time travel, well, everything that’s changed in the past affects the present. But this show never admits that.

 

Not exactly. The first two seasons showed that they couldn't affect what's happened already. They couldn't avoid Culloden. Jamie isn't concerned that America isn't going to lose the Revolution. That's why is kind of ridiculous that he's in the thick of battle and maybe not being a printer in Wilmington or a southern rebel spy. 

 

 

well, sure, they can't change the big stuff, but Claire's going back in time absolutely changed some things.  It was suggested that but for Claire's healing Jamie when they first met, he likely would have died, or at a minimum been gravely disabled.  He almost certainly would never have fathered William and who knows what would have happened to Fergus, who certainly would never have met Marsali.  a whole host of different things happened because of Claire and Jamie. 

The question is, was Claire always destined to go back in time, because her effect actually already happened in her history before she actually did go back in time.  This is suggested because of Jamie's ghost that appeared at the hotel Claire and Frank were staying at in 1946.  If that history actually happened, then nothing they are doing in the past is really changing things.  

[ferjy]

On 8/2/2023 at 11:02 PM, Shermie said:

A big draw of this show was the Scottish/British history, the highlands, the accents. Moving them to America was a huge mistake by the author because it’s such a yawn. I keep waiting for them to get back to Scotland, but time and again they are foiled. Why the author thought this was a positive move is beyond me.

I guess because she's American. But I absolutely agree. I want them back in Scotland. I don't find the American parts interesting. It may be because I'm not in the U.S., maybe it holds more interest for Americans. But it's Scotland that I preferred, or at least in the UK or Europe.

 

[DoctorAtomic]

On 8/3/2023 at 1:24 PM, Hanahope said:

The question is, was Claire always destined to go back in time, because her effect actually already happened in her history before she actually did go back in time.  This is suggested because of Jamie's ghost that appeared at the hotel Claire and Frank were staying at in 1946.  If that history actually happened, then nothing they are doing in the past is really changing things.  

That's what I think the show is saying after the first two seasons. They actively tried to change 'history' and it played out the same. Even Black Jack died when Claire said he would. I don't think anyone is concerned the result of the Revolution is in doubt. 

2 hours ago, ferjy said:

It may be because I'm not in the U.S., maybe it holds more interest for Americans.

No, not really. The Revolution from the North has been done tons of times, so I'm not seeing we're mining any new material here. 

Why isn't it on tonight? It's seems odd to skip a week. 

 

[goldilocks]

40 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

Why isn't it on tonight? It's seems odd to skip a week.

I settled in to watch the next episode and discovered it doesn't air until next week. Why didn't you all say something! 😉Or did everyone else do the same? So dissapointing.

[Cosmocrush]

2 hours ago, goldilocks said:

I settled in to watch the next episode and discovered it doesn't air until next week. Why didn't you all say something! 😉Or did everyone else do the same? So dissapointing.

 

Same😕

[Cosmocrush]

5 hours ago, ferjy said:

I guess because she's American. But I absolutely agree. I want them back in Scotland. I don't find the American parts interesting. It may be because I'm not in the U.S., maybe it holds more interest for Americans. But it's Scotland that I preferred, or at least in the UK or Europe.

 

Isn’t Claire British?  

But I agree with you, I prefer the Scottish settings too.  The American Revolution has been done in lots of TV/movies.  

[ferjy]

1 hour ago, Cosmocrush said:

Isn’t Claire British?  

Claire is, yes. But I was referring to Diana Gabaldon. I was replying to another poster who commented on the author’s bad move (paraphrasing) to bring the story to America. 🙂

 

Edited August 5, 2023 by ferjy

[Scarlett45]

On 7/29/2023 at 6:52 PM, BitterApple said:

The Phil Collins sex scene was so unbelievably cringe. I can't erase it from my mind fast enough. 

It was!

Sophie and Richard are very pretty people but I don’t think they have any on screen chemistry together. Wait that’s not true. They can do “flirty” pretty well, but any blocking for a sex scene just looks awful.