S02.E02: Not In Scotland Anymore

[morgan]

Love the Scot and Sassanach, too, WatchrTina. I don't always agree with them, but I always come away looking at things in a new way. I knew it was a dream sequence because it felt off but didn't notice the scars until Lani mentioned it. I still need to go back and rewatch again.

[GrailKing]

Okay here are a few more thoughts about the episode.  

 

I listened to the podcast by "The Scot and the Sassenach" and both of them immediately knew the opening scene was a dream but for very different reasons.  He (the Scot) noticed that there was a soft-focus lens in place, which is not at all in keeping with how sex scenes have been shot in the past.  She (the Sassenach) noticed that there were no scars on Jamie's back.  He was VERY impressed by that observation and so was I so I had to go back and look.  I don't know.  You only catch a glimpse of Jamie's back in that scene and only a small portion of his back (upper left shoulder).  But I agree -- I can't see any scars.  So now I'm wondering if the scars were left off as a deliberate hint that it was a dream or because they knew you would only catch a glimpse of his back so they could get away with skipping those 3 hours of make-up.

 

Jamie calls Prince Charles "sire" five times during their conversation. Murtagh calls him "your royal highness" which I thought was the proper form of address for a royal prince.   According to this article the word "sire" was used more widely for someone of noble rank during the middle ages but currently it is used only to address a king.  That makes me wonder if Jamie's use that term in this scenario is an anachronism.

 

I love the fact that Louise cannot pronounce Broch Tuarach, which is faithful to the book.

I noticed the soft focusing and knew it was a dream, my wife said to me she thinks one of them is dreaming but wasn't sure what gave her that reason.

As for scars I just replayed it to look and when they first pan on Sam from his left side there are no scars, then we only see his upper left shoulder and no scars, my guess it's from Jamie's pov so he isn't thinking about his scars or flaws when making love with Claire, until maybe BJR comes in to play where he wakes himself up.

I mean if we're having a hot dream do we put our scars or flaws in it?

I don't think so.

On the other hand maybe production screwed up, oh well there's next week. LOL

[maraleia]

Reading the non-book reader thread and lots of viewers are not happy with some of the stuff depicted in the show. Maybe some people shouldn't be watching a show like this which has a lot of nuance to it. As I've said before, I haven't read the books but I'm spoiled because of the internet and I love what they've done to make the wordiness of Diana's books come alive onscreen.

The waxing and Jamie's discovery scenes were so damn cool because this is a debate that is still going strong today.

[Lion]

Some of that seems to be due simply missing details.  For example, people were turning their heads at Claire when she was walking to Master Raymond's.  It's not like she was the only Lady in that area.  It's because she stands out with her style.  And of course, the red dress turned heads.  One only needs to listen to how Louise discusses Claire with the 'finance guy'.  It was "the red dress", no other descriptor necessary.  Everyone in that party noticed.  The king gave her a once over.  

 

I'm not really involved in the fandom, but I feel relatively confident that Louise is not some fan favorite.  I have to lol to that.  On the show, the actress has made her certainly quite enjoyable.  

[WatchrTina]

I am in the fandom and I couldn't care less about Book!Loiuse though I am grateful to her for the assistance she gives Claire in a time of need later on in the story. But I absolutely fell in love with TV!Louise and also with Mary Hawkins. Those two are such a deliciously mis-matched pair.

Oh here is another goody from The Scot and The Sassenach podcast. Both of them spotted that the woman being dressed in the title card scene wasn't Claire. He (the Scot) said knew it was not her style. She (the Sassenach) knew that those weren't Cait's boobs. It was a funny moment when they both shared that info.

[GrailKing]

So the debate till this day line isn't about hair removal?

As far as Claire, I thought her dresses were fine and the women in the back ground studying her up and down told us she was different, but not much so, she wasn't scandalous just a bit out of time with the black and white dress, the only fault I had with the red dress was as my wife said the bottom half was ridiculously too wide.

I don't see how it goes against the upper class people of Paris especially when The King comes out with his escort and her pair of swans.

 

ETA: fixed error.

Edited April 18, 2016 by GrailKing

[WatchrTina]

I'm in love with the books and the show (and the sets and the costumes) and . . . I'm annoyed by the red dress.  It's too wide -- the panniers are larger than anyone else's, which seems out of character for Claire.  The 18th century fashions are awkward enough for a woman of her era.  Why would she opt to make her dress that much more difficult to wear?  They also left out of the show the fact that she and Jamie decided that she should design a dress that would attract a LOT of attention at the party in the hopes that it would help them meet the movers and shakers at court  That was an unfortunate thing to leave out because without it, you have to wonder why Claire would choose to wear THAT dress.  

 

ETA:  I've come up with a fan-wank to explain the red dress.  I'm going to pretend that the seamstress that Claire worked with was horrified by her insistence on clean lines (no bows, no poufs, no frippery of any kind) and, Mon Dieu! no corset.  So she misled Claire into believing that those extra-wide panniers were de riguer at court -- believing that the dress needed them to give it that something extra (that she could them claim credit for) and also, as a dress-maker, fully believing that Claire's height practically demanded the extra-wide panniers in order to keep the proportions of the dress in accordance with the latest fashion..  I can convince myself that Claire got to the court, saw how her dress was wider than anyone else and said to herself "Right.  Not using THAT seamstress ever again."

Edited April 18, 2016 by WatchrTina

[Athena]

Please do not name specific posters here or discuss specific fan opinions especially when they can not reply to you in this thread. You can disagree in broad strokes, but discussion of fandom can be problematic. Do it in a civil manner and realize the show is what it is for others. I know it is tempting to disagree, but people do not need to read the books or research more to watch the show. Thank you.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Please do not name specific posters here or discuss specific fan opinions especially when they can not reply to you in this thread. You can disagree in broad strokes, but discussion of fandom can be problematic. Do it in a civil manner and realize the show is what it is for others. I know it is tempting to disagree, but people do not need to read the books or research more to watch the show. Thank you.

 

 

Apologies. I know better.

 

Topic?

 

I didn't have a problem with Claire's dress, or the way she looked because I knew she was pregnant. And based on my previous and current reading of historical romances by authors who also do research for the time period, I just assumed that with Claire's input over the design, the seamstress also managed to make it look as it did to hide her pregnancy, since she couldn't be corsetted or wear a very tight corset to emphasize her tiny waist, which isn't so tiny right now.

[maraleia]

Please do not name specific posters here or discuss specific fan opinions especially when they can not reply to you in this thread. You can disagree in broad strokes, but discussion of fandom can be problematic. Do it in a civil manner and realize the show is what it is for others. I know it is tempting to disagree, but people do not need to read the books or research more to watch the show. Thank you.

Apologies- I was answering a question and should've done a better job with it i.e. leaving posters names out of my response.

 

Topic- My feeling about the red dress is they should've kept in the dialogue where Jamie and Claire conspire about the dress design so we would understand why it was so different from the rest of the women in attendance.

Edited April 18, 2016 by maraleia

[Lion]

I guess they could have kept that dialogue, but I can't really figure out a way it was necessary.  It's an excellent line in the book, but DG is incredibly wordy.  And repetitive.  And wordy and repetitive.  With only 13 episodes with which to tell this portion of the story, they really need to be as tight as possible with what they do show and what dialogue there is.  We already know they are there to get noticed in order to make connections.  Nearly every scene and voiceover reconfirms this.  It reaches a point of mindless redundancy if everything is explained multiple times over.  

 

Furthermore, these two episodes have shown Claire being firmly in charge of managing their covert affairs.  She's the one delivering orders and praises and making plans.  Jamie, and by extension Murtagh, are following her lead and so far doing little to provide their own input, at least in her presence.  In this tv narrative, it makes sense to drop Jamie's line because right now, he's not calling the shots.  

 

Finally, Louise sends her to a specific dressmaker.  We meet Louise as someone who is a bit outlandish, over-the-top.  We can reasonably figure that this is a woman who is quite daring and will probably be served by those who assist in that daring nature.  Louise specifically mentions that the dressmaker will create something fit for a queen.  Not only did the dress get Claire and Jamie noticed (which is a necessary part of their mission), not only has Claire been in charge of both the mission and her wardrobe, but she was specifically sent to a dressmaker who could make her something that could stand out and above all (or at least almost) all others.  

 

For these reasons, I have zero issues with the red dress and how it came about.  The narrative was clear in establishing the believable steps it took to the red red dress without reminding us constantly and explicitly they are there to get noticed in order to accomplish a mission.  I probably would have enjoyed seeing Claire practicing walking and sitting and maybe even folding her clothes and arguing with the maid some more, but tightly packed 13 episodes means I'm willing to understand these things are done off screen.  

Edited April 18, 2016 by Lion

[CalamityBoPeep]

 

I don't see how it goes against the upper class people of Paris especially when BPC comes out with his escort and her pair of swans.

 

Actually, that was King Louis XV and his mistress... not BPC...

[GHScorpiosRule]

Actually, that was King Louis XV and his mistress... not BPC...

 

 

Yep. The reason why Jamie and Claire were there was because Bonnie Charlie isn't allowed at French Court.

 

Also, I wanted to add, though I didn't care for Buik!Louise, I do find Show!Louise verra amusing and funny. Will see how she is when we get deeper into her relationship with Bonnie Prince Charlie.

[GrailKing]

My mistake.

 

Fixed thanks all.

Edited April 18, 2016 by GrailKing

[Bort]

Also, I wanted to add, though I didn't care for Buik!Louise, I do find Show!Louise verra amusing and funny. Will see how she is when we get deeper into her relationship with Bonnie Prince Charlie.

 

It's funny you say that. Apparently, this is the case for me as well because I don't remember BookLouise at ALL. She must not have made an impact on me whatsoever. ShowLouise is hilariously over-the-top, that is for sure.

[Athena]

I really like the casting on this show. Show!Louise is fabulous and much better than her book counterpart. I think Dominique Pinon is a great Raymond even though he is not how I imagined Raymond to be. It works.

 

I'm here for the period piece and costume porn. However, I honestly glazed over during the BPC scene because while I liked this book, the BPC political intrigue stuff was the most boring.

 

It's funny how Claire and Jamie are basically taller than 80% of the show. They are polarizing people and do get attention. I like that Claire is the protagonist. She had that typical enemies face off with Sandringham that you see other male leads and heroes have on other shows. I don't love Claire all the time, but there is no denying that this is her story and it's really refreshing to see that on TV.

[AheadofStraight]

There was no mention on the show of Louise's relationship with BPC, right?

[Tara Ariano]

In case you missed it, here's the Previously.TV post on the episode!

 

Outlander Does As The French Do, Which Is To Say, It's Gross
Get to know the people of 18th century Paris and all their depraved ways.

[toolazy]

No, and I don't see this version of Louise wanting anything to do with that repulsive little person. 

[AheadofStraight]

No, and I don't see this version of Louise wanting anything to do with that repulsive little person. 

 

Ha, true, but she did also think Mary was crazy for not being happy about marrying an old man with warts on his face. She'd be wealthy!!

[GrailKing]

I really like the casting on this show. Show!Louise is fabulous and much better than her book counterpart. I think Dominique Pinon is a great Raymond even though he is not how I imagined Raymond to be. It works.

 

I'm here for the period piece and costume porn. However, I honestly glazed over during the BPC scene because while I liked this book, the BPC political intrigue stuff was the most boring.

 

It's funny how Claire and Jamie are basically taller than 80% of the show. They are polarizing people and do get attention. I like that Claire is the protagonist. She had that typical enemies face off with Sandringham that you see other male leads and heroes have on other shows. I don't love Claire all the time, but there is no denying that this is her story and it's really refreshing to see that on TV.

My wife said he looked like an amphibian and I thought he matched it as well.

Also as to the dress it's another way of describing Claire's character without using words, and it goes beyond elegant or outsider it visually shows what many think about her .

 

Oh wait this we can do book talk:

He LOOKED like a frog to me

just to be safe.

 

 

 

Edited April 18, 2016 by GrailKing

[GrailKing]

I've read many comments on Yahoo saying that show now become vulgar and full of gratuitous violence. I thought that they really overdid the last two episodes of season 1 in regards to "graphic violence" vs actual substance and storytelling, but other than that I actually think the show is pretty tame in comparison to some other stuff that is being aired those days. Sure, it sometimes depicts violence and ugliness to make a point about that period ot time but really, it's only a small part of the big picture. I've never seen people complaining about violence in, say, "Vikings" (other that saying "Boo, it was so bad back then!") and the stuff they put on there is some of the worst I've seen (like a woman, shortly after childbirth, being publicly tortured for adultery). I guess when "Outlander" will show one of Claire's famous gruesome medical procedures

and it's coming, as one of the reviews of season 2 mentioned a surgery that "will make "The Knick" looks pale"

, people (non readers) are not going to be happy.

I guess some were expecting an entirely different show, probably on the base of marketing? Some were expecting a totally serious historical drama and are put off by all "silliness", other were expecting a Scottish "Pride and Prejudice" and are shocked to discover how violent it actually is...though I'm not sure what's that surprising about the violent nature of life in XVIII century.

I would love to visit and look around, but I wouldn't want to live there: what is Claire thinking!

[Athena]

I think Jamie has a quiet cleverness to him that is not overly dramatic. He is very diplomatic and cunning when interacting with others especially the nobility. In this episode, he gets both BPC and the King talking to him and eventually, trusting him. They are drawn to him as they are in the books. The problem with this kind of maneuvering is that it makes for less than dramatic TV. Jamie is also a good negotiator and can run a business. The kind of quiet and subtle intelligence that Jamie has in the books and show are often overshadowed by him being a warrior and those around him.

[MedievalGirl]

I grow valarian and hops (Humulus lupulus) in my garden. My husband is a homebrewer and we were joking a couple weeks ago about using both in a brew and calling it Sleepytime Beer.

[maraleia]

 

 

Yep. The reason why Jamie and Claire were there was because Bonnie Charlie isn't allowed at French Court.

 

Also, I wanted to add, though I didn't care for Buik!Louise, I do find Show!Louise verra amusing and funny. Will see how she is when we get deeper into her relationship with Bonnie Prince Charlie.

This might be a stupid question but why do you use buik? Is that the Scottish word for book?

[GHScorpiosRule]

This might be a stupid question but why do you use buik? Is that the Scottish word for book?

 

 

No. That's how it sounds when SAM says it. Just like when he says "good,", it sounds like guid. It's just my way of showing my love for Sam/Jamie.

[GrailKing]

When do people think Murtaug learns about Claire in show?

[maraleia]

 

 

No. That's how it sounds when SAM says it. Just like when he says "good,", it sounds like guid. It's just my way of showing my love for Sam/Jamie.

Got it.

 

When do people think Murtaug learns about Claire in show?

I think during episode 3 because they have to speed up the Paris stuff to be done with it by the middle of the season by my estimation.

[CalamityBoPeep]

 

And that's bad IMO They are again stripping Jamie of his strenght, smart and cunning. In comparison to Claire and Murtagh, he seems very passive and with no strong opinions. Claire is charismatic enough on her own as a character, they don't need to diminish Jamie's role to elevate her.

 

This sort of ties in with something that's been floating around in my head for the last couple of days, trying to find a way to become words. :-) I think it's not so much that Claire being in charge diminishes Jamie, to me, as much as Claire doing what she's doing just seems to be a really bad idea. Jamie has always been more strategic and subtle, and I love that about him. But has Book!Claire been this overtly hostile and threatening to powerful men? I remember her bluffing on things, but I don't remember her trying to pull rank through name dropping (other than book 1 where she pulled the Sandringham name out of the blue for Randall). (But to be fair, it's been a lot of years since I read DIA, so I could totally have her characterization wrong here.)

 

I mean, she as good as threatened Sandringham here. And in reality, she's pretty damned powerless... who is going to believe her if she decides to throw him under the bus... er... horse cart? Seriously. She has no power, and he has a lot of power, and she has just come through saving her beloved from the hands of Sandringham's own evil pet. Jamie's in the middle of PTSD and here Claire is, making threats... again. Has she learned nothing from the end of the last season? Maybe she needs a re-watch. And lessons in subtlety from Jamie.

 

When I watched it again last night (looking for the color thing... wow, that's a gorgeous blue couch!), the end of the episode was the only part that I seriously had to side-eye. It got us Sandringham's evil look, yes... but man, she was an idiot in that scene.

 

ETA: Seriously... please, please... refresh my memory of the book. I don't want to have to go searching through that behemoth for a little scene of Claire vs. Sandringham... 

Edited April 18, 2016 by CalamityBoPeep

[GHScorpiosRule]

I think the scene with Claire and Sandrinham was made up for the show.  I don't think Claire saw the Duke again until after he'd kidnapped her and held her in his home. or his sister's home. Mind you, I read this last Spring.

[toolazy]

I think the scene with Claire and Sandrinham was made up for the show.  I don't think Claire saw the Duke again until after he'd kidnapped her and held her in his home. or his sister's home. Mind you, I read this last Spring.

 

I think that they were all at an outing with various people from court.  I think it was when everybody rode out to the country to look at horses or something.  I know that they did run into Sandringham in France, though. 

 

However, it was a generally cordial meeting.  I don't recall any hostilities until they were back in Scotland.

Edited April 18, 2016 by toolazy

[aemom]

I never thought that the waxing scene would happen the way it does in the book and I was actually surprised that they showed it at all.

When people are lost in the woods or abandoned at sea or countless other scenarios where people do not have the comforts of home, TV or movies will usually depict the men growing facial hair, but the women always remain magically hairless. This has even been true on Outlander. We've seen Claire naked many times and her underarms are always hairless. So, they couldn't go with the scene the way it was written in the book. I do like how they used it to show how hard PTSD has been for Jamie to deal with.

[Archery]

 

The actor who plays Alex Randall not only bears a similiarity to Tobias Menzies but their voices also are alarmingly alike.

I didn't appreciate the recapper referring to him as a "twink" AT ALL. 

 

I mean, she as good as threatened Sandringham here. And in reality, she's pretty damned powerless... who is going to believe her if she decides to throw him under the bus... er... horse cart? Seriously. She has no power, and he has a lot of power, and she has just come through saving her beloved from the hands of Sandringham's own evil pet. Jamie's in the middle of PTSD and here Claire is, making threats... again. Has she learned nothing from the end of the last season? Maybe she needs a re-watch. And lessons in subtlety from Jamie.

I think Claire is playing a long game of chess.  She actually does have some power over Sandringham: she can expose his sexual secrets -- might not go very far in France, but in Britain, he'd be ruined.  She can expose him as a Jacobite, and he'd lose his head.  And it ties in with the Red Dress gambit:  if she's successful and catches Louis' eye (not difficult, that) or otherwise insinuates herself with the court ladies, Sandringham will have no control over what she whispers or how far that whisper will go.  He cannot afford to call her bluff. 

[maraleia]

I didn't appreciate the recapper referring to him as a "twink" AT ALL. 

 

Me either.

[Lion]

I didn't appreciate the recapper referring to him as a "twink" AT ALL. 

 

 

 

Me either.

 

Adding my voice here, too.  This recap had a lot of offensive or problematic language (twink, 'gay-ish' head swivel, queer).  He has a long history of this.  It's pretty disgusting.  

[WatchrTina]

I know that they did run into Sandringham in France, though.  However, it was a generally cordial meeting.  I don't recall any hostilities until they were back in Scotland.

I'm doing this from memory but aren't they in the gardens of Versailles when Claire and Jamie see the Duke and then they both mistake Alex Randall for Blackjack?  If so that's the first time they see Sandringham.  But there is no confrontation with him because, in the book, there is no letter of petition in play.  That was made up for the TV show.  Then, later in the book, aren't they in Sandringham's house when Jamie comes face-to-face with Black Jack and he calls him "Jamie" in that creepily tender way?  Jamie tells him never to address him as anything but Laird Broch Tuarach -- until such time as they may be facing each other across drawn swords.  Then and only then would he be allowed to call Jamie by his first name and only because he would be staring in the face of death (i.e., James Alexander Malcolm MacKenzie, "Muthafuckin" Fraser.)

 

Damn, I wish I could find that scene in my Kindle.  It's pretty bad-ass.  Meanwhile, back on topic, I presume they see Sandringham at some point during that episode as well since they are in his house.  Does this match anyone else's memory?

Edited April 19, 2016 by WatchrTina

[Clawdette]

There was one bad cut in the show that I noticed and it was when Jamie and Claire are discussing Jared's letter. Jamie and Murtagh have returned from their fencing practice and Jamie is appropriately disheveled until the last shot when he tells Claire that the meeting site is a brothel. His hair is neatly styled (for how they are styling it now - yuck most of the time) and it gave me a jolt the first time I viewed. They are generally better at matching different cuts.

ETA: On my Kindle the BlackJack encounter starts on page 292.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Clawdette

[maraleia]

Adding my voice here, too.  This recap had a lot of offensive or problematic language (twink, 'gay-ish' head swivel, queer).  He has a long history of this.  It's pretty disgusting.  

Well queer is OK to use now but the rest...just NO. (I'm a lesbian BTW)

I'm particularly sensitive when it comes to LGBT stuff of late and since Diana and Ron/Maril don't wade in those waters then the re-capper shouldn't because well, he should know better.

[Lion]

Well queer is OK to use now but the rest...just NO. (I'm a lesbian BTW)

I'm particularly sensitive when it comes to LGBT stuff of late and since Diana and Ron/Maril don't wade in those waters then the re-capper shouldn't because well, he should know better.

Queer continues to be a contentious term and it matters when it's used, how it's used, where it's used, who uses, etc.  In certain situations, it's problematic.  The author of the recap identifies as a gay male, but that hardly means that it's appropriate to use when authoring a recap, especially when the context includes stereotyping behaviors (like his description of King Luis' movements).  I self-identify as queer.  It's a word I use fairly frequently, but where appropriate.  I wouldn't use it in an essay for work, unless the paper were through a specific lens or required discussion of queerness.  The author isn't writing the recap through an LGBTQIA lens.  

 

To be fair, I think it would be great to recap with a queer lens seeing as both the show and the books are extremely problematic in how they present presumed gay characters.  The Duke of Sandringham and BJR embody some of the worst, most offensive stereotypes.  Instead, the recapper chooses to use offensive and problematic language.  

[maraleia]

Queer continues to be a contentious term and it matters when it's used, how it's used, where it's used, who uses, etc.  In certain situations, it's problematic.  The author of the recap identifies as a gay male, but that hardly means that it's appropriate to use when authoring a recap, especially when the context includes stereotyping behaviors (like his description of King Luis' movements).  I self-identify as queer.  It's a word I use fairly frequently, but where appropriate.  I wouldn't use it in an essay for work, unless the paper were through a specific lens or required discussion of queerness.  The author isn't writing the recap through an LGBTQIA lens.  

 

To be fair, I think it would be great to recap with a queer lens seeing as both the show and the books are extremely problematic in how they present presumed gay characters.  The Duke of Sandringham and BJR embody some of the worst, most offensive stereotypes.  Instead, the recapper chooses to use offensive and problematic language.  

Understood and thanks for the info.

[vesperholly]

Yes it was funny Jamie pushing him off but the amount of time before the splash was heard was far to long.

 

That gorgeous bridge over a waterfall is fictitious, as none like it exist at Versailles. I don't even think there's any kind of waterfall, just a crap ton of ponds. The land within walking distance of the Palace is also quite flat.

 

My slight gripe is that if they're going to explicitly be at Versailles, the party (as indicated by the view of the gardens/fountain) was in the famous Hall of Mirrors - which was distinctly lacking in any mirrors or even the chandeliers. I understand why logistically it would be a nightmare to shoot, but that room wasn't even close. And they were so detailed in the fountain and the curlicue gardens! Le sigh.

[asp]

You're right vesperholly

 

This is the only one:

 

Filming in the Hall of Mirrors would truly be a nightmare...

Edited April 19, 2016 by asp

[Andorra]

There was no mention on the show of Louise's relationship with BPC, right?

 

The script to the episode is out (you can find it at http://www.outlandercommunity.com ) and it has a few cut lines, where Charles says, that he's found himself a noble Maitresse already, who is unfortunately trapped in a loveless marriage. I'm sure this is Louise and we will probably get the "Charles interruptus" in the next episode.

 

There're several other interesting things in the script. One is the author's note to the waxing scene. He writes, that they knew it was a fan favorite, but they weren't sure how they could include it. Show Claire doesn't have neither hairy legs nor hairy armpits and the light mood also was difficult in relation to Jamie's PTSD storyline. What they show is a compromise. They tried to keep a little bit of the humor, but also wrote it into a scene to show Jamie's suffering and Claire's attempts to draw him out of it. 

 

Another interesting tidbit: The cuts. There were several cuts which I thought were very sad. One is the "completely different haircut" cut in the scene with the letter. The line Jamie is saying about the place being a brothel is from a whole different scene that got cut. They probably filmed that line as a pickup much later after they cut that scene and didn't pay enough attention to his hair.

 

Another cut I deplore is in the scene with the red dress. I thought Jamie's change of mood from "you can't go out like this" to "I guess it'll have to do" was a bit sudden. There're a few lines missing where Claire "persuades" him so to speak and I think it's sad that they're not on screen any more. Also Terry Dresbach said, that they filmed a short sequence where the maid ran to the coach and brought a larger fan for Claire, which is the fan she is wearing at Versailles. Since that sequence is missing, too, it is weird to see her with the big fan when she left home with a small one. 

[Dust Bunny]

My slight gripe is that if they're going to explicitly be at Versailles, the party (as indicated by the view of the gardens/fountain) was in the famous Hall of Mirrors - which was distinctly lacking in any mirrors or even the chandeliers. I understand why logistically it would be a nightmare to shoot, but that room wasn't even close. And they were so detailed in the fountain and the curlicue gardens! Le sigh.

 

I missed the Hall of Mirrors, as well. It's such a beautiful and iconic room. Yet, I'm guessing it would have been quite expensive to design anything remotely like that. And they'd probably have to shoot at angles to avoid the cameras showing up. At those angles, you might not even be able to appreciate the mirrors. So it kind of makes sense that they didn't do that. But yes, that room makes Versailles Versailles, so I agree with you.

[toolazy]

That explanation of why they changed up the waxing reveal makes perfect sense and I'm kind of ashamed that it didn't occur to me.

[SoTheresThat]

I don't find Ron's podcast on the Starz site or this episode on On Demand yet.  Is it just me?

[WatchrTina]

No, it's not just you.  I've been eagerly awaiting it as well and even tweeted @Outlander_STARZ to ask when it would be available on STARZ.com but I did not get a response.

 

ETA: Still no podcast (Friday after the broadcast) but I've just realized, based on Terry's latest blog post, that she and Ron are on a well-deserved vacation (they're on a cruise) so perhaps Ron simply hasn't recorded the podcast yet.  I think he genuinely enjoys doing them so I'm confident it will eventually turn up and that subsequent ones will go up more quickly.

Edited April 22, 2016 by WatchrTina

[katville]

While I loved everything about this ep -- the costumes, gasp! -- my favorite part was the "bitch, please" look that Sandringham gave Claire at the end. Simon Callow can do no wrong.