S02.E04: La Dame Blanche

[Athena]

Quote

Claire and Jamie throw an elaborate dinner party intended to derail investors in Prince Charles’ war effort.

This is the Book Talk thread. Open book spoilers from all the books. Do not proceed if you are unspoiled.

[Rilla-my-Rilla]

Can't say I'm a super fan of them finally getting it on after Jamie comes home with the bites. At least in the book they were intimate before and on better terms when this happened (as far as I remember)

[Hybiscus]

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

I know there's much more I loved, but I have to watch it again to remember them all.

[toolazy]

I am ridiculously giddy - this is my favorite episode of the season so far.  Finally, Jamie & Claire reconnected - another episode of them being estranged would have been too much.  I like that they managed the public poisoning without having her shitting herself in front of a whole bunch of people.  

Honest to god, so much happened in this episode that I'm going to have to watch it a couple more times before I can be all that coherent about it.  That said, I would watch a spin-off with Murtaugh & Fergus.  

[Dust Bunny]

Wow. That was a really full episode. In the midst of all the heaviness, I appreciated the little moment of Fergus taking advantage of an empty table. Fergus is such a breath of fresh air in every scene. And he called Claire "Milady"!

Starts right off with the bitter cascara scene. And ends with the fight. I sort of feel like I have whiplash.

I loved the bite mark scene. I was surprised how Sam delivered the fortress speech wrapped in a bit of anger instead of despair. It worked really well, and it helped carry the emotional beats that led to them finally making love. The way Sam and Cait play off each other - it's just a joy to watch them.

And I was really surprised - almost shaken - by Sam's facial expression and delivery of the "This is wonderful news" response to Jack being alive. It actually filled me with dread for what he would do. That was an intriguing way to write it. I also noticed it was directed so that we couldn't see how Jamie was reacting to Claire's words, which helped land the surprise.

"Cut his head off." Just in case there wasn't enough foreshadowing, it was said twice. I hope the payoff is big, even though it's for a different person in the room.

Laurence Dobiesz continues to blow me away as Alex. It's like he's studied Tobias' Jack's mannerisms. And yet, you can tell he's got such a softer spirit. Spot-on casting and acting. 

Interesting place to stop the episode. I'm guessing we'll get Murtagh's oath next week. I'm kind of exhausted after watching that, but all the performances were wonderful. There was so much intentionality in this episode. I love that. 

Quote

I would watch a spin-off with Murtaugh & Fergus. 

Agreed.

Edited April 30, 2016 by Dust Bunny

[metaphor]

I really liked this episode, perhaps my favorite of the season thus far as well. 

I thought that discussion between Claire and Louise about having the baby and raising him/her with a man that is not the father was lovely, if on the nose. I'm enjoying the development of that relationship, even though I am clueless about how it goes, not having gotten to this part of DiA yet in my reading. Also enjoying the dynamic between Master Raymond and Claire.

Finally, I liked the fight between Jamie and Claire and their subsequent reunion. It's great to have them back in sync again. I've missed that in the recent run of episodes.

The next episode should be interesting. 

Edited April 30, 2016 by metaphor

[IntrovertGal]

Wow what a marvellous episode, probably my favourite of the season so far as well. Some of the dialogue was lifted straight from the books, which I loved. Jamie's fortress speech moved me immensely, Sam's acting was very intense in that scene. So happy that Jamie and Claire finally reconnected, the distance between them was a real downer in the last few episodes.

That dinner was so uncomfortable and cringe-worthy and funny all at the same time, I was highly entertained by it.

Poor Mary, that rape scene was very hard to watch. Alex being all sweet and caring and telling Mary that he loved her and still resembling BJR/Tobias so much in his looks and mannerisms was a very strange contradiction to behold.

I'll need to rewatch the episode, this was a very full episode indeed.

[morgan]

Well happy birthday to me, finally Jamie and Claire connect!  I loved the bite scene which spurred Claire to let loose a bit on him finally, and loved that Jamie is letting her in.  The fortress scene was delivered so differently than I expected...anger rather than despair.  It reminded me so much of when Claire told Jamie she was from the future.  The delivery was so different than I expected it to be it threw me off at first.  Still both well done and just so happy to have then talking again!

Poor Mary.  Sigh.  And yes Alex is doing a phenomenal job.

Love Fergus so much.  I don't think I could love him more than when he pulls up a chair  at the table and feasts.  Just another day, eh Fergus?   Might as well not let all this delicious food go to waste. I wonder if they will just skip completely over his desire to be beaten over leaving Claire?

Loved l'hopital scenes, and Raymond scenes.  I will say that while I normally don't care for bodily function scenes and definitely prefer them to take place off camera, I thought Claire's poisoning wasn't terribly effective.  She barely seemed affected by it at all.  I wouldn't have minded a bit more discomfort than was shown.  Some more groaning even or curled up in a ball/sweaty mess instead of calmly lying there maybe.  I don't know.  

There is so much to this episode my head is spinning and I can't wait to watch it with mr.morgan tonight!

 

Definitley can't wait till next week!

[Andorra]

Wonderful episode! That was really a great hour of TV. Funny, serious, touching, exciting, there was so much in it!

First of all I loved it that Claire told Jamie about BJR and he didn't just find out and blamed her later. Then I loved it that he was relieved instead of the cliché anger at Claire because of not telling him. That was suprising and beautifully played by Sam.

I LOVED the bitemark scene. It was so hilarious. I was happy Claire was a little less relaxed about it than she is in the book. In the book I always thought her reaction was very unbelievable. She is sure of Jamie, but seriously, I'm not the jealous type and I would have demanded more of an explanation than she did in the book. So here in the show, I thought her reaction was great and it lead to the wonderful "fortress" speech of Jamie, which was yet again brilliantly delivered by Sam. 

And then of course it led to the alcoven scene,which was so beautiful and much too short. I loved their little exchange later, when he told her she has built him a "lean to and a roof to keep the rain out". Directly from the book and so touching!

Bloody Charles. He is so annoying! I love the actor though, he plays him wonderfully. The cast is amazing anyway. Fergus, the Comte de St Germain, Louise, Mary, Alex and of course Sandringham, they're all marvellous. Really, really great casting!

I was relieved that the rape of Mary was not shown very explicitly. I think they handled that very well, it was not at all voyeuristic, no "torn dress", no "naked breast" showing etc. Applause to the show for that!

I think I'll have to rewatch serveral times, I'm not sure I even caught everything, because so much was going on!

[Clawdette]

Quote

 

"I was so looking forward to dessert."  That entire episode was made of dessert!

[KateJones]

What a great hour of television. This might be my favorite episode of this season so far. The reunion in the alcove after such a powerful exchange between Jamie and Claire (fortress speech) and then the end sequence were just brilliant.  Brilliant. I love this show. 

[WatchrTina]

OMG that was SO GOOD!   I ended up shouting "Bravo!" all alone in my apartment.  I'm off to watch it again.  And again.

[ScotchnSoda]

To all my Outlander "sisters", YES, YES, YES !  I'm rejoicing to join the chorus of your accolades for S2,Ep4 ! 

At last we have real emotions from our wonderful cast, and in my opinion, it's because we are at last (or at least until Ep6) rid of Metin Huseyin (the director of Ep1-3). He directed S1's "The Watch" and "The Search", not among my S1 favorites. And the - how to say it ? - "flatness" of every bit of the 18th century S2,Eps1-3 must IMO be placed at Huseyin's doorstep.  Given the decisions of S1, the writers of S2,Eps 1-3 have been wonderful in conveying tons of info, both structural and emotional.  Goodness me, we had Ron Moore, Ira Stephen Behr and Anne Kenny writing the words!  No.  I can't shake the feeling that Huseyin just doesn't get the soul-deep (even eternal) bond between Claire and Jamie.  And worse yet, he didn't take advantage of the truly collaborative relationship between Cait and Sam. Both are eminently capababe of conveying the growing coolness, loss of footing and aloneness that Claire and Jamie were feeling.  But, I believe Cait and Sam instinctively could have portrayed these feelings with something more wordlessly communicative than blank eyes and sullen looks.  Given directional "gracious space" the distance between their characters could have been imbued - by body language, tone of voice or gaze of eye - with a sorely missed nuance of Claire and Jamie's ever abiding and visceral need for one another. 

So, the disappointment and, even, dread I was beginning to feel have been washed away, and I'm thrilled that the Outlander TV program I fell in love with has "come back to me" (and to us) !! 

[Dust Bunny]

I was reading reflections on this episode on another book reader forum, regarding Mary's rape (was it necessary, does it impact the character/advance the story...), and it got me thinking of something. While Claire was the one who wanted to continue dinner ("the show must go on"), Jamie was absolutely OK with cancelling dinner on the spot. I don't remember exactly how it was in the book, but I think I'd like to see Jamie being especially empathetic with Mary in the next episode. (I kind of liked how Jamie was poised to immediately well-nigh kill the perpetrators, as soon as he found out what happened.) It could answer a lot of the whole "is there as much empathy of a woman being sexually assaulted as there is a man" questions, vis-à-vis Claire in "Both Sides Now" which happened before Wentworth. At the very least, they can show some true devotion between Alex and Mary. It would show the huge contrast between Alex and Jack. I've really appreciated the adaptations this season so far, including honoring Jamie's PTSD and how it has impacted Claire; I'm hoping they'll manage this too.

Edited April 30, 2016 by Dust Bunny

[morgan]

I would like to see that sharp contrast with Alex/BJR too, as well as Jamie's empathy.  I do totally buy Claire's "show must go on" attitude because I felt her switch into Nurse Beachamp in triage mode.  She stemmed the bleeding (metaphorically as well as physically) of one injury (Mary) and headed off to what she hoped would amount to a (metaphorical) amputation at the dinner table (BPC implosion).  Fully intending of course to get back to Mary as soon as it was over.  

Cant wait to watch again later.  

[GHScorpiosRule]

YES!!!!!!! RECONNECTION! HUMOR! EXCITEMENT! FIGHT!FIGHT!

And Claire telling Jamie that Black Jack was alive. I was really hoping, that after they made love, that Jamie would have explained the bite marks, and wasn't it around this time, that Claire told Jamie about being called La Dame Blanche and then he explains that's what he called her so he could "manly" refuse the prostitutes's favors? I thought he explained that in the buik, aye?

Or does that happen later?

I expected to see Mary's rape, as it was a big part of the story. But I'm glad they portrayed it the way they did---with Mary not being naked/stripped. Though I don't think she was in the buik, either. But at least it wasn't prolonged.

No Lie, I grinned when Jamie reacted with happiness after Claire told him about Black Jack.  And how he said he wasn't stupid enough to go running back to Scotland to kill him, but that now, he would get to kill him with his own hands.  

I'm really loving Show!MasterRaymond.

For a moment, I thought Wee Fergus would keel over, after eating and drinking the food, just because.  Didn't Compte Germain suffer some ill effects at the dinner? And it was Claire's payback to him?  And YES! Wee Fergus referring to Claire as "MiLady!"  I am happy. And Jamie "Milord."  The actor is a pure joy and gem.

I got the FEELS ye all! The bluidy FEELS!!!! watching Jamie and Claire make love, and then the kissy kissy scenes. SIGH...The tension, 'tis no longer in me belly.

And on a purely shallow, shallow and SELFISH note, I really wish Sam spoke with that sexy Scots Brogue in real life.

Wot?

[maraleia]

I really loved this episode for so many reasons that I'll comment on later. Wanted to ask everyone here if they are having trouble reading the forums due to the font type and size? I hate the changes in that regard.

[Dust Bunny]

8 minutes ago, Grashka said:

I've seen discussions like that past season, when some reviewers were bringing up that less time was spent on Claire's and Jenny's traumas in "Both Sides Now" and "Lallybroch", than on Jamie's in "To Ransom Man's Soul" but personally I have never seen it as women vs men contest. It's not only that Claire and Jenny have not been, thankfully, raped (and Jenny's encounter with Randall had taken place a couple of years prior to the events shown in "Lallybroch") while Jamie was - repeatedly and with horrifying violence. But this is not even that. If Jamie's trauma has been emphasized both in show and the books, it's not IMO because he is a man, which supposedly makes his suffering and humiliation more important, but because Randall didn't content himself with Jamie's body, he was getting to the core of his soul, making Jamie question and doubt everything about himself. I think it was in "Drums of Autum" where Jamie was telling that Claire: as painful and humiliating as those acts were for him, he could have dealt with it well enough. It was Randall trying to possess his spirit that almost drove him mad.

Mary is a minor character, who so far has been in three scenes in which she's speaking, so it's hard to expect her getting as much attention as one of two leading characters. Still, I think the show handled her scenes with more care than, say GOT, which has been featuring raped women with flapping breasts, like some sort of horrible background decoration "cough Craster's daughters cough"

Well said; I agree with that. I'm just kind of hoping there can be a bit of Jamie empathizing with Mary to minimize some of that critique. That and seeing that Mary's trauma matters because Mary matters, and her rape isn't just used to build up other people's arcs, which was a critique of Sansa's rape in relation to Theon Greyjoy's redemption arc in GoT.

Edited April 30, 2016 by Dust Bunny

[GHScorpiosRule]

Putting this here because there's no UO thread where buik talk is allowed. Sooo...

I'm a mean and cold-hearted wench, but I don't want to see any more extra time or emphasis spent on Mary's recovery, other than what was covered in the buik because Mary was not, and is not, a MAJOR character. So I go 'pfft' to the naysayers (and I mean naysayers out there, all over the internets, not here) who will and are clutching their pearls if she doesn't get as much attention as Jamie's PTSD has.  Apples and oranges, as far as I'm concerned.

I mean, even Inside the episode (if ye watched it first On Demand), neither Ron or the writer, Toni Graphia, even talked about the rape or mentioned it or what it would mean for the show. Just about 'a lot of things happened,' and how they managed to seat 16 people, by having only three women, Claire included, because the bustles or whatever, were three feet long and made it impossible to have an equal number.

[Lion]

This was really enjoyable. I've been in the minority in that I wholeheartedly approved of Claire and Jamie experiencing the distance between them.  I didn't have any special feelings about the abbey cave scene so it's not something I missed.  The way they portrayed their relationship post rape has not only been very realistic, but it's a great improvement in the adaptation.  It's made their reconnection much more meaningful, and also joyful to watch. 

I can't remember in the book who did the poisoning and who set up the attack.  I vaguely recall that the Duke was involved in at least one of those plots, but can't be certain.  (and thanks to anyone who can remind me of these things).  I've been so curious if the show will get into the Comte being a fellow time traveler and a relation to Raymond (and by extension, Claire) so I might be reading more into it than is really there.  I'm starting to see these scenes between the Comte and Claire as way less sinister than perhaps they really are.  I almost feel like they have to touch on it because there won't really be another chance to do it in the future considering his survival and ultimate reveal as a time traveler happens in a side story well outside of Jamie and Claire's story.  So when he's watching Claire with such intensity, is it because he's planning something sinister, is it because he just really hates her, or is it because he realizes she's just like him (of course it could also be all of the above). 

I thought Fergus' was both parts adorable and concerning.  Adorable because the actor is just so perfect for the role.  Concerning because (1) the inappropriate eating is often a problem orphans experience due to neglect, abuse, periods of hunger and other traumas so it's really sad to see it (though I'm not even sure anyone involved with the production has any concept of childhood traumas, which is annoying) and (2) it doesn't jive with how we know he acts after the attack on Claire and Mary.  I thought I recalled him being very upset about it, and the way his table eating is filmed makes it seem like he's not yet so attached to Jamie, which is too bad.  Their relationship is such a special one. 

30 minutes ago, maraleia said:

I really loved this episode for so many reasons that I'll comment on later. Wanted to ask everyone here if they are having trouble reading the forums due to the font type and size? I hate the changes in that regard.

The new forum is terrible.  I can barely read anything, I can no longer follow my shows, and a dozen other problems.  I hope they'll be fixing their fuck up quite soon.  

[GHScorpiosRule]

2 minutes ago, Lion said:

I can't remember in the book who did the poisoning and who set up the attack.  I vaguely recall that the Duke was involved in at least one of those plots, but can't be certain.

The Duke was behind the attack in the alley.  I seem to recall that in the buik, Jamie showed up, and it was Jamie, that the Duke wanted...hurt or killed. Or am I thinking of another attack?

[toolazy]

When is the Comte revealed to be a time-traveler? Is it the story where Michael delivers Joan to the convent?  

[Lion]

8 minutes ago, toolazy said:

When is the Comte revealed to be a time-traveler? Is it the story where Michael delivers Joan to the convent?  

Yeah, The Space Between.  I think it's one of the best books in the series, tbh.  

[toolazy]

Thanks. I feel like I read it but I don't really remember much - I'll have to check it out again.

59 minutes ago, Lion said:

 

The new forum is terrible.  I can barely read anything, I can no longer follow my shows, and a dozen other problems.  I hope they'll be fixing their fuck up quite soon.  

You can follow your shows, it's just not as easy - look for "Manage content" or something like that in the menu next to your screen name at the top right of the screen.

I'm not too unhappy with the redesign - the site seems to work better on my computer. 

[WatchrTina]

OMG there is so much to love about this episode but the main thing is the writing.  They did SUCH a good job adapting the novel in this episode.   I make a lot of comments and ask a lot of questions in the “BAD” section below, but really I loved this episode – I think it’s the best one so far this season.

 

THE GOOD

The costuming continues to do a great job in contributing to the story-telling.  Claire’s dress for her visit to Versailles is fussier than we’ve seen before (fancy trim down the sides of the central panel and ruffles on the panel) which I take as evidence of her making an effort to fit in there (while continuing to wear more simple dresses at home.)

 

I love the double entendre of Le Comte’s speech about how “He’ll have you in two moves Fraser. . . . How boring.  The outcome is so terribly obvious that I do not see the point of watching the rest.”  I take this to be a commentary on the attack he has already planned for Claire and his belief that the outcome (her death) is inevitable. 

 

Aw.  Did you notice that in the first scene Claire is wearing a ribbon around her throat just like the one she wore on her wedding night?  I don’t think that is an accident.  I think we are supposed to have the wedding night in the back of our minds all through this episode (more on that later.)

 

I like the fact that Claire stopped Jamie from reacting to his desire for vengeance, not once but three times in this episode.  First she tells him that he can’t take vengeance on Le Comte St. Germain for trying to poison her because they have no proof and the scandal will interfere with their anti-uprising efforts.  Then she flat-out countermands his orders to Murtagh when the two of them want to go find the men who attacked Mary and Claire.  And finally she tells Jamie there will be “no beheadings” (though admittedly I don’t think Jamie was serious about beheading a dinner guest in his own home, in front of witnesses.)  Jamie is not perfect and his belief in the virtue of vengeance (a Highlander trait) can sometimes get him into trouble (as we see in later books.)  I was gratified, however, to see that even when he learns that BJR is alive he is not foolish enough to want to go to Scotland to hunt him and risk the hangman’s noose.  In that case, both Murtagh and Claire underestimated Jamie.

 

That exchange between Claire and Murtagh about why Jamie is happy again is another good example of Claire’s tendency to sometimes be self-deluding.  She says “I don’t know what you were worried about” as if she wasn’t worried about exactly the same thing.  This is consistent with her saying in a prior ep, “Jamie will be happy if I’m happy” about her decision to volunteer at the hospital.  He wasn’t and on some level she must have known that he wouldn’t be, but, to paraphrase “The Big Chill,” rationalizations are more important than sex – ever try to get though a week without a rationalization?  I like that Claire is not perfect in every way.

 

Oooooh, they hinted that M. Raymond may be a fellow time-traveler.

 

Oooooh they showed us that M. Raymond knows how to deceive people via slight-of-hand trickery.  This will be important in a certain Star-Chamber scene.

 

Oooooh, Claire said Frank’s name.  That gave me an absolute frisson up the spine.  But that thrill is nothing compared to what Claire must have felt when M. Raymond said she would “see him again.”  Oooooh.

 

I thought the conversation between Claire and Louise about terminating her pregnancy was well-handled.  It’s a tricky topic (I’m sure there are both pro-life and pro-choice fans) and you can interpret Claire’s behavior in that scene in a couple of different ways.  I think she would have given Louise the abortifacient if Louise really wanted it but, unlike Geillis (who had a regular business along those lines), Claire also warned Louise of the risks and encouraged her to consider all her options, ultimately leading to Louise changing her mind.

 

My final oooooooh was when Louise asks, “How can I raise a child with a man who is not the father?” followed by Claire asserting, “All that matters is that the child is brought up with love.”  Sniffle.  Excellent throwback to her and Frank’s decision in episode 201.

 

The whole scene between Jamie and Claire when he returns from the brothel all revved up and ready for action – that whole scene, including the “blade of grass” speech, right through to the scene of them finally (Finally!) making love in the day-bed was perfect.  I am frankly amazed by the way this show can move from humor to pathos to sexy-times so smoothly.  They did it before in the “honeypot” scene (though, alas, that one ended with pathos and not sexy-times) and they did it again here.  Just masterfully done.

 

Did you notice Frank’s wedding ring catching the light and gleaming in the dark while Jamie and Claire were making love?  I did and I don’t think it was an accident.  In fact, if you look for it, that ring is prominent in a number of scenes, including at the dining room table after BPC leaves.  I think the prominence of the ring is symbolic of how Frank haunts this entire episode.

 

Did you notice how much Jamie looks like wedding-night Jamie during their post-coital (post BPC visit) chat in the dining room?  His hair has been trimmed and is shorter than in the last episode and I don’t think THAT was an accident either.  I think there are a number of visual cues in this episode to encourage us to subconsciously harken back to their wedding night.

 

The scene between Murtagh and Fergus was great but they really should have been keeping a better eye on the coach.  Come on boys, you had ONE job.

 

Mary’ reaction to M. Foret’s “hangman’s grease” was perfect.  “I need to wash my hands . . . “

 

The look on Claire’s face after Mother Hildegard says “You, madam, are a great deal better than nothing” is lovely and I’d love to see a screen shot of that in circulation.  Cait is looking particularly luminous at that moment.

 

I loved Fergus’ creative English:  “There is a problem with the carriage.  There will be lateness involved.”

 

Jamie notices that Le Comte does not bow when Claire is introduced but he does not notice that the Duke also does not bow.  Nice, subtle hint that the Duke is surprised to see Claire looking so well.

 

I loved how the reveal of Louise’ pregnancy was handled.  BPC finds out about it “off camera” in the book.  This is so much better.

 

THE BAD

As much as I like the foreshadowing of the wheel bolt being removed from the carriage wheel during the title card (complete with the important port-wine-stain birthmark on his hand) I can’t help but wonder how someone could do that in broad daylight and not be noticed.

 

Is it realistic that M. Raymond (who is no fool) would sell fake poison to a servant he did not recognize?  I thought that was out-of-character.  I wonder if we are supposed to assume he is lying to Claire and that he DID sell the black cascara to Le Comte St. Germain but did not know she was the intended victim.

 

Was Claire’s reference to Zulus anachronistic?  Would a 17th century Frenchman know what a “Zulu” was?  Was that supposed to be a mistake by Claire and an “Ah ha!” moment for M. Raymond?  If so I didn’t get that.  It just felt “off.”

 

I really wish that Claire had waited and put the poison-detecting amulet on AFTER she learned that Le Comte St. Germain was a dinner guest.  She did it deliberately in the book and I always liked the idea of her non-verbally telling him “don’t bother trying to poison me again – it won’t work.”

 

How did Prince Charles know which window was Jamie’s bedroom?  The book handled that more believably with Jamie hearing Charles calling to him via the fireplace and then Jamie going up on the roof to retrieve him.

 

I thought it was out-of-character for Mary to confess to Claire that she had been corresponding with a young man and that she was “in love” with him.  Such behavior would be considered extremely improper in the milieu in which she was raised.  I understand why it is in the plot – it justifies Claire’s decision to leave Alex to watch over the sleeping Mary and it keeps the specter of her eventual marriage to Black Jack before the viewer – but it did not seem consistent with the naïve, shy Mary who was presented in the previous episodes.

 

I thought it was unrealistic for the Duke to invite the Comte to someone else’s dinner party without bothering to tell them.  L’Etiquette governed behavior at this time in such a strict fashion that it rang false to me that the Duke would commit such a clear faux pas.  Then again, perhaps he did it deliberately as a way of demonstrating his power and ability to flout the rules or maybe he did it to ensure that Le Comte could not be accused of being involved in the assault on Claire.  More likely, the writers just needed him there and thought it would be unrealistic for Jamie and Claire to invite him so soon after her being poisoned.

 

I don’t understand why the Duke – who is nothing if not politically savvy – would make snarky comments about the pope at a table full of Catholics (virtually all upper-class French are Catholic at this time).  And why on earth would he say it in front of Prince Charles, knowing perfectly well that his father King James  has been living under the protection of the pope for years?  Are we supposed to think that BPC’s inappropriate kiss of Louise’s hand was enough to make the Duke completely reconsider his support of BPC?  Or are we supposed to think the Duke is deliberately trying to provoke the prince in order to get the measure of the man?  And why does Louise try to change the subject when BPC brings up politics?  Is it just that she is angry about the kiss?  I couldn’t quite wrap my head around their motivations during that conversation.

 

Pun is the lowest form of wit.  The French of this era actually hated puns if the movie “Ridicule” is based on fact.  And puns seldom work as humor when your audience speaks English as a second language.  So the Duke’s joke was really bad.  Did he also intend it as an insult to Prince Charles (who is short and who needs money)?  If so, does it seem realistic that the Duke would be motivated to snark on the prince so quickly?

 

Claire’s voiceover at the dinner table makes no sense given the time-table shown in the episode.  Is she actually suggesting that Le Comte took part in the attack and that the attack was “two hours ago”?  I got really confused there.  I wonder if the decision to edit the episode so that it cut back-and-forth between the attack and the dinner was made after the episode was written and filmed.

 

Alex is an idiot.  I know he was trying to prevent Mary from ruining herself by revealing her presence in the house (and what had happened to her) but all the grabbing was just dumb.  Him ending up on the floor on top of her felt very contrived.

 

I feel like something got cut out of the fight in the drawing room.  Why on earth would Claire toss Jamie curtain ropes to use as a weapon?  Not that it wasn’t an entertaining choice -- it just felt odd.

 

THE UGLY

Aaaaand we get to see another compound fracture.  Ew.

 

OTHER

Does anyone know what BPC says to Louise when he talks about how fleeting happiness is?  “Por con miseria”?  Is that Italian?  Louise’ husband did not seem to understand it.

 

Every time BPC says “Mark me” I think of that roman emperor in “Gladiator” who was always “vexed.”  We should make up a drinking game around that phrase.

 

I have to wonder how many times Cait had to walk up those stairs to M. Raymond’s shop.  I’m sure all those scenes were filmed in one day with Cait changing costumes three times for the three visits over three episodes.  Think about all the camera angles they needed -- that day must have been like a never-ending workout on a stair-master for her.

 

Finally, can we talk about Jamie and his need for vengeance?  I have such mixed feelings about it.  His reaction to learning that Jack is still alive is really troubling.  I hate the idea of Jamie being brought back to himself by the mere idea that someday he’ll get to kill Jack.  I guess that is true to the book – in the book it is the act of raping “Jack” (while in his opium-enhanced fever dream) that makes all the difference – but that is a dark place he’s gone.  I hate the idea of him being able to finally make love to Claire again only because he knows that someday he might be able to kill Jack.

Edited May 1, 2016 by WatchrTina

[morgan]

I just finished my second viewing, this time with mr.morgan, and did not notice the prominence of Frank's ring.  Good catch...and an excuse to rewatch.

 

i will say that while I like DIA more than most seem to, I do remember France seems to become a bit of a slog and that is pretty much what mr.morgan (non book reader) felt about this episode.  I felt it zipped along nicely and was able to accomplish so much but I wonder if non book readers will feel the same?  He is ready for Scotland and I had to promise him it is coming!  

[WatchrTina]

Quote

Well happy birthday to me

morgan do you realize it is also Sam's birthday?  What a serendipitous coincidence.

And I'm with you -- I thought this episode "zipped along" terrifically.  I'm amazed at how much plot they fit into one hour.

Edited May 1, 2016 by WatchrTina

[morgan]

Yes, I have recently (well in last few months) entered the Twitter-sphere and follow sam.  Fun to realize we share a birthday!  I knew we had a connection!  Hehe

WatchrTina thinking about Cait and those stairs...not just Cait climbing them over and over, but over and over in heavy costuming!  She must have thighs of steel!

I have to laugh about the BPC drinking game with, "mark me" because I said as much while watching tonight.  He says it so often I admire Jamie's restraint in not punching him in the face.

[Wouldofshouldof]

Prince Charles: "I have a ghastly and painful injury to my hand."

Me: "Oh, did someone drive a spike through it?!?"

[Lion]

3 hours ago, toolazy said:

 

You can follow your shows, it's just not as easy - look for "Manage content" or something like that in the menu next to your screen name at the top right of the screen.

I'm not too unhappy with the redesign - the site seems to work better on my computer. 

To clarify, I don't consider the "Manage Content" feature to be at all useful in actually following shows.  I used to be able to go straight to My Show page and know which forum had been updated and even see the most recently updated thread in that forum, straight from the My Show page.  Now it's just a list, which is stupid.  The note at the top of the forum says the David Whoever bot knows about the problem and suggests that it will be fixed or improved.  We'll see.  

2 hours ago, WatchrTina said:

I don’t understand why the Duke – who is nothing if not politically savvy – would make snarky comments about the pope at a table full of Catholics (virtually all upper-class French are Catholic at this time).  And why on earth would he say it in front of Prince Charles, knowing perfectly well that his father King James  has been living under the protection of the pope for years?  Are we supposed to think that BPC’s inappropriate kiss of Louise’s hand was enough to make the Duke completely reconsider his support of BPC?  Or are we supposed to think the Duke is deliberately trying to provoke the prince in order to get the measure of the man?  And why does Louise try to change the subject when BPC brings up politics?  Is it just that she is angry about the kiss?  I couldn’t quite wrap my head around their motivations during that conversation.

 

Pun is the lowest form of wit.  The French of this era actually hated puns if the movie “Ridicule” is based on fact.  And puns seldom work as humor when your audience speaks English as a second language.  So the Duke’s joke was really bad.  Did he also intend it as an insult to Prince Charles (who is short and who needs money)?  If so, does it seem realistic that the Duke would be motivated to snark on the prince so quickly?

 

Well the Duke isn't supposed to be sympathetic to Catholics or the Stuart royal family, so his behavior seemed perfectly legitimate and justified.  He was acted as any high ranking noble Englishman would in that environment.  BPC was being his usual fuck up by getting pissy, and I assume Louise recognized that the Duke couldn't sit at the table and feign agreement or camaraderie with the Stuart prince.  It seeme to me like she was genuinely trying to help Charles because she understands the politics of the game while he clearly doesn't.  

Quote

I feel like something got cut out of the fight in the drawing room.  Why on earth would Claire toss Jamie curtain ropes to use as a weapon?  Not that it wasn’t an entertaining choice -- it just felt odd.

Because it's a non-lethal weapon that was better than what he had.  That heavy tassel at the end served it's purpose quite well.  Another plus is that the rope can be used to tie people up to help them calm down.  

2 hours ago, morgan said:

 

WatchrTina thinking about Cait and those stairs...not just Cait climbing them over and over, but over and over in heavy costuming!  She must have thighs of steel!

 

I think most of the shots of her going up the stairs are done from behind without even showing the side of her face, so I assume it's probably a stand in quite a bit of the time.

[WatchrTina]

Quote

Does anyone know what BPC says to Louise when he talks about how fleeting happiness is?  “Por con miseria”?  Is that Italian?

I'm quoting myself because when I watched with closed captions the phrase was written "Porca miseria".  It is Italian and my internet research says that it is probably derived from "sporca miseria" which translates literally as "dirty misery" but which equates roughly to "bloody hell" in British English.

So, did anyone else notice the color the Le Comte St. Germain's coat at the dinner party and that it is the same color as the person in the opening credits who is holding a knife behind his back?  That evil Comte -- he's going to pull a knife on someone.

[Nidratime]

The very end where we see Fergus sitting himself at the abandoned dining room table to feast on the leftovers strangely reminded me of the beginning of Season One's wedding episode where it opened with a cat on the table at the inn eating the leftovers of a celebratory dinner.

[WatchrTina]

Every time I watch this episode I crack up at Jamie's protestations to Claire that -- bite marks on his thighs notwithstanding -- "nothing happened" with the whore.  I think Claire got it exactly right -- he went to a whore to get "worked up", 69-style, but still thinks himself faithful and virtuous because he brought his woody home to her.  That's not how he got the bites in the book.  He was going along, just not too far, with the whole whore-house vibe in order to stay in BPC's good graces.  He finally made up the "La Dame Blanche" story when it looked like he was going to be pressured into actually having sex with a whore.  Claire wasn't too happy about it but it's pretty clear that Book!Jamie really did not want to consort with whores and he found a clever way to get out of it so that he could stay faithful to Claire.  TV!Jamie actually seems to have hired a whore and taken her for a test-drive in order to see if his equipment still works.  Okay, he stopped the proceedings when it became clear that, yup, it was all in working order and then he hot-footed it home to his wife but still -- TV!Jamie makes me laugh.  He really is clueless if he thinks that voluntarily getting "warmed up" by a whore before coming home to his wife is the same as "nothing happened."

[GHScorpiosRule]

46 minutes ago, WatchrTina said:

Every time I watch this episode I crack up at Jamie's protestations to Claire that -- bite marks on his thighs notwithstanding -- "nothing happened" with the whore.  I think Claire got it exactly right -- he went to a whore to get "worked up", 69-style, but still thinks himself faithful and virtuous because he brought his woody home to her.  That's not how he got the bites in the book.  He was going along, just not too far, with the whole whore-house vibe in order to stay in BPC's good graces.  He finally made up the "La Dame Blanche" story when it looked like he was going to be pressured into actually having sex with a whore.  Claire wasn't too happy about it but it's pretty clear that Book!Jamie really did not want to consort with whores and he found a clever way to get out of it so that he could stay faithful to Claire.  TV!Jamie actually seems to have hired a whore and taken her for a test-drive in order to see if his equipment still works.  Okay, he stopped the proceedings when it became clear that, yup, it was all in working order and then he hot-footed it home to his wife but still -- TV!Jamie makes me laugh.  He really is clueless if he thinks that voluntarily getting "warmed up" by a whore before coming home to his wife is the same as "nothing happened."

 

Yeah, I was hoping that Jamie would explain himself more here--like he did in the buik. 

That said, I didn't get the sense that he was clueless--just that Claire wouldn't let him explain.  I also didn't think that he went to a hoor to get a "test drive," but that all that pawing got him all lustful, and he didn't want them, but Claire, and wanted to expend his lust, if you will, on his wife.

But aye, just as Buik!Jamie makes me laugh, cry, angry, so does Show!Jamie.

What can I say? I'm totally Jamie's bitch.

[Lion]

More about the Comte.  My partner pointed out to me that the he looked concerned when Claire threatened him with poison after the talk about her necklace.  It strikes me that from his view, the Frasers can be seen to almost be gunning specifically for him.  All of the things we've seen him actually do in retaliation has been to try to embarrass them (and he appears to take such joy in it as that's when he gets his best smiles), like when disrupting the chess game or ensuring the 'police' were called which will certainly create a minor scandal.  We can speculate that he tried to poison her but it's not something that has been confirmed.  

Now that he's leaving with BPC, knowing that he will be be a BPC financier, that at this time he's having an affair with Geillis (assuming they keep to the books) and that he's colluding with the Duke who has surely had some harsh words to say about Claire, things definitely have different optics when viewed from the Comte's eyes.  The Fraser's have been complicit in destroying his property (yes, I know he intended in being complicit in causing a smallpox outbreak) and now Claire has openly threatened him.  The Comte and his wife were giving one another such long meaningful looks.  It's hard to really determine if it's because they intend(ed?) to do something against Claire or that they were worried what Claire would do to them.  

[toolazy]

4 hours ago, Nidratime said:

The very end where we see Fergus sitting himself at the abandoned dining room table to feast on the leftovers strangely reminded me of the beginning of Season One's wedding episode where it opened with a cat on the table at the inn eating the leftovers of a celebratory dinner.

That's awesome! I love this.

[cryptaknight]

On 4/30/2016 at 3:16 AM, metaphor said:

I thought that discussion between Claire and Louise about having the baby and raising him/her with a man that is not the father was lovely, if on the nose. 

I never realized how many children in this series are being raised by fathers not their own, until this scene sort of dragged the theme to the forefront. But it starts with Roger and Fergus, really, and goes on until the later books. There's something to the idea about the love we find and the families we build that is a thread throughout all of the books... I'll need to ruminate on it a bit.

[Haleth]

I love the casting for this season of the show.  Mother Hildegard, Master Raymond, Sandringham, Fergus, Alex... all of them stepped right out of the pages.

Quote

Was Claire’s reference to Zulus anachronistic?  Would a 17th century Frenchman know what a “Zulu” was?  Was that supposed to be a mistake by Claire and an “Ah ha!” moment for M. Raymond?  If so I didn’t get that.  It just felt “off.”

 

I think that was for the audience.  We'd see that Raymond wasn't surprised or confused by her reference, but in fact understood what Claire is.

Quote

I thought it was unrealistic for the Duke to invite the Comte to someone else’s dinner party without bothering to tell them.  L’Etiquette governed behavior at this time in such a strict fashion that it rang false to me that the Duke would commit such a clear faux pas.  Then again, perhaps he did it deliberately as a way of demonstrating his power and ability to flout the rules or maybe he did it to ensure that Le Comte could not be accused of being involved in the assault on Claire.  More likely, the writers just needed him there and thought it would be unrealistic for Jamie and Claire to invite him so soon after her being poisoned.

I don't remember the scene in the book.  Was the Comte at the dinner?  Did Jamie and Claire invite him?  It does seem a breach of etiquette for the Duke to invite him, but it wouldn't be out of character for him to want to see Claire squirm.  Sandringham is astute and deliberate and very dangerous.  He does nothing without purpose, whether inviting enemies to a party or making bad jokes in front of the Prince.  He knows what he's doing.

My husband, who knows nothing of the books and really nothing about the show was watching with me and said, "That is the most uncomfortable dinner party I've ever seen."  And that was before Mary started screaming and furniture started flying.

Quote

To clarify, I don't consider the "Manage Content" feature to be at all useful in actually following shows.  I used to be able to go straight to My Show page and know which forum had been updated and even see the most recently updated thread in that forum, straight from the My Show page.  Now it's just a list, which is stupid.  The note at the top of the forum says the David Whoever bot knows about the problem and suggests that it will be fixed or improved.  We'll see.  

Lion, what might be helpful for you is to create a customized home page once that feature is available again.  (David had to remove it temporarily.)  When you open the forums only the shows you follow will show up and those with new content will be highlighted.  It was working just as well as the old "My Shows" button for me before David took it down.  You can also check the Questions forum for suggestions about font size.  Good luck!

Edited May 1, 2016 by Haleth

[Pallas]

Quote

Wanted to ask everyone here if they are having trouble reading the forums due to the font type and size? I hate the changes in that regard.

From David Cole in the pinned Questions? forum:

Quote

 

You can (change font size)via your browser. Usually CTRL and + on Windows and Cmd and + on Mac. There's extensions for most browsers for even finer control over changing a site's look and feel if you really want to get in the weeds on it.

 

Life's been better ever since.

[nodorothyparker]

There was a lot to like in this one.  For as much as Sam always brings the pretty, he was really knocking it out of park from the beginning of the bitemarks discovery seguing into the blade of grass explanation.  There was a whole lot of range happening in those scenes from the almost slapstick humor he does very well in trying and trying to explain himself only to end up making it worse to the quiet defiance of "this is where I've been all along."  I like that the writing allowed both characters to show that they were both struggling with their own self-absorbed thinking and realizing that that's what it was without painting either of them as wrong or bad people because of it.

Claire's violet dress in her visit to Master Raymond and Louise's red number at the dinner party from hell were all the good things.  The party itself was hilariously awkward and uncomfortable with Jamie deftly setting up the Duke to show what a tone-deaf boor he is to a table full of Catholics and Charlie to show what a ridiculous special snowflake he is to anyone pinning any hopes of success on him.  And that's before a proper Scottish brawl broke out in the living room.

I'm finding myself liking show Raymond more than I ever did book Raymond, but he still makes me think of hobbits every single time he appears on screen.  I think it has something to do with the actor's apparent short stature next to Claire combined with his accompanying background music and design of his set but I don't know for sure.  I'll admit I'm not a huge fan of the book character because mysterious characters who are mysterious without any payoff tend to wear on me pretty quickly.  All the dialogue about seeing Frank again and children raised without their biological fathers feels pretty heavyhanded, so I'm sure that's not helping either.

The low-key talk between Claire and Louise about Louis's predicament was nicely done.  As much as I hate Mary Hawkins' rape, that and the reality that for all her privilege Louise is still in a mostly precarious legal place at the whims of her two men highlight how women are valued in this society.

[WatchrTina]

Quote

 In "Voyager" Jamie spends almost 1/3 of the book in rags and then he is a proud owner of one coat, two shirts and breeches while Claire is going about her business wearing the same Jessica what-her-surname dress.

Weel, actually Claire loses her 20th-century dress pretty quickly in book 3 and gets some authentic 18th century duds courtesy of the Madam at the whorehouse.  I rather suspect that season 3 Claire is going to have the same unexplained robust wardrobe that season 1 Claire had because they uses costume changes by Claire as a visual cue for "okay, this scene is taking place on a new day vs. the one you just saw."

That being said, I completely agree with your original premise about them pulling out all the stops on costumes this season because it's their one opportunity to really go crazy with the costume porn.  I don't think it's an accident that both Terry and the set-designer were invited to put together show-and-tell videos for use at the PR panel that was done at the Television Academy.  If ever there was a seasons when the two of them might be recognized for their efforts with an Emmy nod -- this is it.

 

Quote

I never realized how many children in this series are being raised by fathers not their own, until this scene sort of dragged the theme to the forefront. But it starts with Roger and Fergus,

Don't forget Claire!  We meet Uncle Lamb in the very first episode.  But yeah -- this whole series is a tribute to how flexible the term "family" is -- particularly during times of war.  It's one of the things I love about the books.

 

Quote

There was a whole lot of range happening in those scenes from the almost slapstick humor he does very well in trying and trying to explain himself only to end up making it worse to the quiet defiance of "this is where I've been all along."

I remember a line from "Steel Magnolias" where Dolly Parton's character says "laughter through tears is my favorite emotion." We haven't seen that on Outlander that I can recall but we have certainly seen some wonderful funny / poignant / heart-breaking / sexy scenes -- particularly between Jamie and Claire -- and I give Sam & Cait all the credit for being able to maneuver between those emotions so deftly and so convincingly.  For example -- Sam's face in the "honeypot" scene where his facial expressions goes from tender-and-intrigued-but-uncertain to holy-shit-what-have-you-done-woman in a heartbeat.  They do it again in this episode.  I laugh a LOT at Jamie in the scene you mention above, until I stop laughing and he breaks my heart.

Edited May 1, 2016 by WatchrTina

[maraleia]

20 minutes ago, Pallas said:

From David Cole in the pinned Questions? forum:

Life's been better ever since.

That still doesn't help the fact that the font color is too muted and the font type is really hard to read. Why couldn't they have kept the font they used before?

[nodorothyparker]

I'm really struggling with the managing forums stuff.  Without being able to see what's been posted recently in any of the dozen conversations I'm trying to keep up with, it's damn near impossible.  And some I'm losing track of altogether.

I've always assumed if we get to season 3 and beyond that it will probably look a whole lot like the first season did.  The men will all have an outfit or two and Claire will happen to have a good half dozen pieces or so that are serviceable but not ostentatious just so we're not looking at the same damn dress every day for months on end.  It may be historically accurate for a good segment of the population at the time, but for modern audiences that are used to bathing and changing clothes regularly it's not sexy. 

[Andorra]

11 hours ago, WatchrTina said:

 I think Claire got it exactly right -- he went to a whore to get "worked up", 69-style, but still thinks himself faithful and virtuous because he brought his woody home to her.  That's not how he got the bites in the book.  He was going along, just not too far, with the whole whore-house vibe in order to stay in BPC's good graces.  He finally made up the "La Dame Blanche" story when it looked like he was going to be pressured into actually having sex with a whore.  Claire wasn't too happy about it but it's pretty clear that Book!Jamie really did not want to consort with whores and he found a clever way to get out of it so that he could stay faithful to Claire.  TV!Jamie actually seems to have hired a whore and taken her for a test-drive in order to see if his equipment still works.  Okay, he stopped the proceedings when it became clear that, yup, it was all in working order and then he hot-footed it home to his wife but still -- TV!Jamie makes me laugh.  He really is clueless if he thinks that voluntarily getting "warmed up" by a whore before coming home to his wife is the same as "nothing happened."

I actually don't think the scene is that much different to the book. I don't think he hired a whore, I think she just was all over him, as she was in the book, trying to get him to do a  69 with him, as she might have tried before during the many nights he went to the brothel with BPC. I think the novelty for him was, that he got an erection and that made him realize he could sleep with Claire again, so he rushed home happy and excited to do just that. Unfortunately she interpreted his happiness and excitement understandably different and that lead to their fight. 

I'm sure we will hear more about "La dame blanche" in the next episode. If I remember correctly, he only told her about the story he invented later in the book ,too,

[nodorothyparker]

The bitemarks scene made more sense in the books where Jamie's still wearing a kilt most of the time.  Last episode made a point of showing one of the ladies of the evening hanging all over him when he was just trying to have a drink, and in the books I never found it implausible that with a kilt things could have shifted around while a girl was trying to drum up some business and boom, teeth marks on your thighs.  I think the pants he's wearing at the start of the scene muddy the waters a bit but I didn't read it much differently here either.

There's some master level eyerolling and exasperation going on in the scene where Charlie comes in off the roof and he's just going on and on and on about his painful and ghastly injured hand as a test from God.  Jamie and Claire are just like, you have no fucking idea, you pompous little twit.

[WatchrTina]

Quote

I don't think he hired a whore, I think she just was all over him, as she was in the book

I listened to the podcast by The Scot and the Sassenach on this episode last night and their conflicting takes on this situation had me howling in laughter.  It is worth noting that they are married in real life and he is "The Scot" in that relationship.  She basically said if Jamie had been wearing a kilt then that explanation (an aggressive whore) might have flown but he was wearing pants. You do not get bite marks on your upper thighs involuntarily if you are wearing pants.  And a 6'3" warrior does not become divested of his pants by a whore involuntarily.

Their discussion of this episode was great.  It ran long (an hour and 20 minutes) and I ended up staying up WAY past my bedtime listening to it because I was enjoying it so much.

[Andorra]

1 minute ago, WatchrTina said:

I. You do not get bite marks on your upper thighs involuntarily if you are wearing pants. 

Why not? He's wearing silk pants. Don't you realize how thin silk is? It's perfectly possible to get bitemarks through a silk layer. 

[WatchrTina]

Okay for the sake of argument let's say a whore snuck up on Jamie, somehow managed to get her head between his legs, and bit him hard enough to leave clear bite marks through silk pants (if they even are silk -- more on that later).  How on earth did she manage to do it TWICE?  There was a bite on each thigh. No way would Jamie sit still for the second bite.

As for the pants being silk -- I doubt it.  Satin, maybe, but not silk.  Men's pants have to have a little oomph to the fabric -- some thickness and strength -- to make any sense at all for a merchant to wear them out on the town.  Maybe a king could loll about in silk trousers but that seems an unlikely fabric choice for Jamie.  Now let's try to imagine a whore biting a man's thighs through slippery satin breeches that are probably well tailored, meaning the fabric is stretched snuggly across his thighs while seated.  Nope, I'm not seeing it.  Though I am enjoying trying to imagine it.  :)

Oh yeah, let try to imagine a whore in 18th-century French panniers trying to maneuver herself under one of Madam Elise's tables in order to make a sneak attack on Jamie's thighs.  Not seeing that either.  Jamie totally took a whore for a test drive to see if he could become aroused without thinking of Black Jack and then he did a comically poor job of explaining it to Claire.

Edited May 1, 2016 by WatchrTina

[Andorra]

Well, we have to agree to disagree then. I can see it all. We see the whore being all over Jamie in the episode before. We've read in the books how they're coupling on the tables right next to Jamie. And I can absolutely see a whore trying to convince Jamie to do a 69 with her in pants just as I can see it her doing it in a kilt, by crawling all over him. Why is it easier to apply two bitemarks with a kilt than doing the same with pants? Jamie admitted he was tempted and that he "badly" wanted to, but "nothing happened". 

I certainly CAN'T see Jamie hiring a whore. He would never do that. . 

[Starla]

Claire was absolutely stunning this episode. She is always beautiful, but there were a few shots of her where she lit up the whole scene and was breathtaking. She seems to have the pregnancy glow.

One thing I missed seeing in this episode was the layout of Master Raymond's back room as described in the book. It seemed so mysterious, with a hidden stairway going down into a basement under a table. I never could quite picture it and would have loved to see it on screen. I guess that was too difficult to set up so they turned it into a normal back room.