Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

S02.E07: Faith


Athena
  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

Quote

Doctors at L'Hopital des Anges attempt to save the lives of Claire and her unborn baby; King Louis asks Claire to judge two men accused of engaging in the dark arts.

Note: This the No Book Talk thread. Book discussion of any kind is prohibited including "It was different in the books" and liking posts.

Link to comment

Wow!  What a powerful episode!  I was enthralled - and kept in suspense (which I do not believe I have truly felt like this since the beginning of the season) -  all throughout the show.

Random observations ahead:

  • Knew Fergus was getting raped as soon as I saw the "rape" warning at the beginning.
  • I just loved Suzette and Magnus welcoming Claire home.  Thought it was a beautiful touch that she curtsied to Magnus as a show of mutual respect and thanks.  Was kind of surprised that she did not react more to Suzette's show of affection.  But maybe it was because Magnus accompanied her to the duel.
  • Where the hell was Murtaugh?  Claire said she laid in the hospital bed for weeks.  Shouldn't he have been back by now?  
  • I thought it was very interesting how they showed Claire's necklace changing colors during the "trial".    And St. Germain knew it.  
  • I felt so sorry for Le Comte.  Did I think he really didn't know about Les Disciples?  I'm not so sure.  And the way he glanced at the King and Monsieur Forenz (sp?) was très suspect.  I wonder if they were involved also.  But I don't think he was guilty of anything more than Monsieur Raymond either.  (Okay, other than trying to poison Claire, which I guess he didn't know wasn't really poison.  Hm.  Interesting.)  But dark arts?  Nah.
  • What a wonderful friend Louise is.  I know she can be rather air-headed, but for her to come to l’hôpital and hold Faith - for  a woman of her rank - that really showed her love for Claire, I think.  
  • Claire in 1954 (was it?) was gorgeous!
  • That red haired girl was definitely Jamie's so Claire obviously gets pregnant again.
  • I thought they way they portrayed a woman mourning the loss of child due to miscarriage/still birth was very sensitive and accurate.  I don't  know from personal experience, but it was beautiful.  
  • Love 7
Link to comment

That was by far my favorite episode of the season. Caitriona Balfe should submit it to the Emmys.

I'm floored... I thought it was really well done, especially the parts with the King.

  • Love 4
Link to comment

Great episode and love that it was mostly focused on Claire. I loved that Bouton was right there next to Claire. Best episode of the season, and I can see why they would want to get the hell out of France! (being 1/2 French I can say that!). Back to Scotland!  Yeah!! 

Link to comment
(edited)

I was surprised that Claire is still around in 1954. I would have thought she would have tried to go back by then. Now I'm wondering if she'll meet the 1960s woman in real time. 

I agree with Claire though that keeping the Count alive is a smarter move even though it would have been very easy to say he should die. She played that con really good though. Nice show. Her "oh ffs look when they rolled out the snake" was hilarious. But, sorry, Count, you reap what you sow.

I don't know how historically influential the count was, but I'm assuming we've screwed up history. Again.

I don't get why she didn't tell the straight up tell the king that BJR raped a boy though. She had a reasonable argument.

Claire had me figuratively rolling. I lied back and thought of England. Then: Oh, he's done already. Uh, ok. 

Massive credit to Claire for being able to pull it together on her own in only a few weeks too. Also massively wise of Jamie to say, "Frank is your family too." Good call there. 

Hey, look at it this way, Jamie! You're eskimo brothers with the king!

3 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

That red haired girl was definitely Jamie's so Claire obviously gets pregnant again.

Especially making the point that Faith was also red haired. I think that the show has made that quite clear (heh).

Didn't Claire say she wanted to go back to Scotland? Are they bagging the plan to stop the battle? Seems kind of a waste given the enormous effort Jamie made to get into the confidence of Charlie. Not to mention he's leaving his cousin's business while he's absent. 

Edited by ganesh
  • Love 4
Link to comment

Oho this was so incredibly sad. I was really, truly hoping that poor Fergus wasn't getting raped or anything, but  :( he did. the poor kid. Honestly, what the bloody hell is wrong with Randall, like. he just sees a kid and goes, what the hey, let me rape the kid? (I really hope they are taking him to Scotland). [also. :( what really sucks is that - even if Fergus didn't get caught and brought the lavender, it would have brought back horrendous memories for Jamie. not that Fergus would have known that but it's just that little extra twist of the knife]. 

Everything seriously and severely broke my heart. Honestly it did. Poor little Bairn. I wonder if she was stillborn if something was going to be wrong, regardless if Claire wasn't stressed and racing after Jamie. I'd like to think that would have been the case vs. Claire/Jamie blaming themselves for something that bastard did.

Master Raymond is so cold. But I have to admit he was also quick to draw which is also something very impressive. I wonder why Germaine (so pretty and sad at the end), was so adament to be like "Claire ruined me." well no. your ships had smallpox dude. Get over it. 

Where in the blessed hell was Murtagh? (i feel robbed of a WWMD moment. which would have been to say screw Frank, and cut off the balls of Randall, imo). 

I'm glad we're leaving France. I'm just sad mystery baby has been solved. they do have a second (and another girl, with copper hair, with ears that stick out and slanted eyes)... but i really wish we didn't lose the first one. 

 

and with all that being said.... they're just leaving without resolving the Jacobite plot?

  • Love 2
Link to comment

Poor Fergus!  I really hope they're going to bring him home with them, poor boy.  Of course Jaime couldn't let BJR get away with that, imagine how many other victims he could have had in that 'year of grace.'  This entire episode was a masterpiece!  Master Raymond certainly did Claire and himself a favor by giving her experiment seemingly valid results, and it's hard to cry much for the Comte given all that he's done.  

I loved Claire's line about 'I'll just add it to the list of things I've lost in Paris.'  While they did ruin Charlie's wine scheme, I still think Murtaugh was right, killing the bonnie prince outright would have had a higher chance of changing history. 
 

  • Love 3
Link to comment

This is the first episode I watched since deciding I could not deal with the sexual violence on this show.

Maybe it was the careful way the historic details of interaction , protocol, dress and address were dealt with, but this episode was so convincing and to me, powerfully persuasive that a palace could easily have run this way.

Sex was one of the few favors a woman could offer as entree into the men's game of politics and persuasion. Even though Claire has more power than her women contemporaries, due to her advanced medical and herbal/plant knowledge, she uses sex occasionally as a survival tactic.

Link to comment

This episode had me feeling so sad for everyone. Poor Claire lost her baby and had to deal with it all on her own (although major points to Master Raymond, Mother Hildegarde, Bouton, and Louise for the kindness they showed her). Poor Fergus was not only raped but blamed himself for Jamie being sent to the Bastille. Poor Master Raymond was finally apprehended because he came back to help Claire and save her life. Poor Jamie was worried that Claire hated him. Even poor Comte St. Germain when he saw Claire's necklace chance and knew he was about to die. I think the only person I didn't feel sorry for during this entire episode was King Louis.

I was totally fine with St. Germain dying though. I mean, his defense to Louis was, "Dude, she's totally a witch and I know this because I tried to poison her and she didn't die!" I mean, seriously, guy. Your attempted murder failed and this is your attempt at a get out of jail card?

I thought that either Claire would try to keep it a secret that she slept with Louis or that Jamie would lose it when she told him. He took it rather well, so I'm glad he didn't tell her that she shouldn't have done it. The fact that he equated it with sacrificing himself to Randall to save her put things in a different perspective. Although I have no doubt that Claire hated every minute (well, the whole minute) that she was having sex with Louis, her experience was far less traumatizing, both mentally and physically, than what Jamie endured with BJR. If we can be thankful for anything in situations like that, at least Louis wasn't a sadistic bastard and it was over quickly.

Seeing how upset Claire was when she woke up and realized that she was no longer pregnant was painful enough but the flashback at the end when we saw her holding the baby until Louise took her away was just heartbreaking.

If they are really going back to Scotland right away, I will miss the beautiful French locations, the ridiculously fancy scenes at Versailles, the gorgeous costumes, Mother Hildegard and Bouton, Master Raymond (although since he's been exiled from France, maybe he can show up in Scotland), and Louise's friendship with Claire. I hope they take Fergus with them. I was really glad that Claire had no resentment or blame at all about Fergus's inadvertent role in Jamie being in the Bastille.

  • Love 5
Link to comment

There is soooo much to like about this episode.  It was heartbreaking and sad and beautiful.  And overall I really liked it.

But there are a couple of things that took me out of the episode.  Fergus' rape.  I felt they showed too much.  I didn't need to see that.  So I was thinking about the discussions that must have went on behind the scenes about how much they would show.  And what does this say about the character of BJR.  He'll just rape anything that moves apparently.  He's tried to rape women, men and children.  Are any actual humans that horrible?  Oh hey, there is a kid in my room, I'll rape him? 

And my second take me out of the story was Raymond healing Claire.  It seemed so unrealistic, but then I had to remind myself this was a story where multiple people time travel.  It's such an odd thing.  It's a time travel story, but every other element feels so real and like a normal drama.  You sort of forget the mystical elements until they show their head and remind you.

But those are minor bothers.  On the whole, it was still wonderful and Cait was amazing.  Hopefully in Scotland there will be some wonderful moments of Claire and Jamie being connected and romantic again.  France has just been a disaster for them.

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, ganesh said:

So daughter number 2 is the red haired woman from the 60s right? 

You mean Gellis? I don't think that the math can work out, but maybe. Wouldn't Gellis be in her early 30s when she is in Scotland? She is not portrayed as a young woman (like early 20s). 

Link to comment
9 hours ago, ganesh said:

I was surprised that Claire is still around in 1954. I would have thought she would have tried to go back by then. Now I'm wondering if she'll meet the 1960s woman in real time. 

I agree with Claire though that keeping the Count alive is a smarter move even though it would have been very easy to say he should die. She played that con really good though. Nice show. Her "oh ffs look when they rolled out the snake" was hilarious. But, sorry, Count, you reap what you sow.

I don't know how historically influential the count was, but I'm assuming we've screwed up history. Again.

I don't get why she didn't tell the straight up tell the king that BJR raped a boy though. She had a reasonable argument.

Claire had me figuratively rolling. I lied back and thought of England. Then: Oh, he's done already. Uh, ok. 

Massive credit to Claire for being able to pull it together on her own in only a few weeks too. Also massively wise of Jamie to say, "Frank is your family too." Good call there. 

Hey, look at it this way, Jamie! You're eskimo brothers with the king!

Especially making the point that Faith was also red haired. I think that the show has made that quite clear (heh).

Didn't Claire say she wanted to go back to Scotland? Are they bagging the plan to stop the battle? Seems kind of a waste given the enormous effort Jamie made to get into the confidence of Charlie. Not to mention he's leaving his cousin's business while he's absent. 

1.  I love the idea of Claire meeting Geillis before the latter goes back in time.  It would explain why Geillis was always suspicious of Claire.  She knew Claire, but Claire didn't know her yet.

2.  I was also wondering why Jamie and later Claire did not tell everyone that BJR was raping Fergus.  After all, even if they allowed a English officer a pass for rape, which they might do for diplomatic reasons to not create issues with the English, surely the homosexual aspect would have gotten him executed during that period.  Perhaps Claire felt that since was not there to witness the rape, the king would not believe her.  Or perhaps she knew that pandering to the king's whims was a more certain and faster way to get what she wanted.

3.  I hope they explain before they leave how they plan to continue the BPC plan in Scotland.  With Murtagh disposing of the stolen wine, the Comte dead, Sandringham out of the picture, and BPC discouraged and depressed (per last episode), perhaps they feel that they have accomplished their task by cutting off his funding.  Of course, they would be wrong...Or maybe, they decide they can now focus on poisoning the Scots against BCP.

 

6 minutes ago, GenieinTX said:

And my second take me out of the story was Raymond healing Claire.  It seemed so unrealistic, but then I had to remind myself this was a story where multiple people time travel.  It's such an odd thing.  It's a time travel story, but every other element feels so real and like a normal drama.  You sort of forget the mystical elements until they show their head and remind you.

I kinda had the same reaction to the healing.  It's funny that we can accept time travel, but then be jarred by other shows of magic/mysticism in the show.

My observations:

  • I'm not sure what the point of the heron was.  Given the focus on Faith in the episode, it might have made more sense for Claire's 1950's daughter to see a picture of siblings and ask why she doesn't have one.  Also, I would have thought that Massachusetts would have herons too, but I'm not claiming to be knowledgeable about that topic.
  • I thought the hospital scenes and everyone's sadness at the loss of the baby were very well done.  I haven't gotten as attached to the France supporting characters like I did with the Scotland ones, but this episode showed how much the characters in the show had bonded.  I was particularly moved by Louise and it was in that scene that I actually cried.  In the previous episode, we saw her be a real flake with her callous attitude towards the poor.  For her to come to see Claire in a hospital for the poor and then for her to be the one to help Claire let go of the baby showed a maturity in her character that we had not seen before.  I like it when characters are shown to have multiple layers.
  • What is up with Buton?  Is that dog just really well trained or somehow magical?
  • I thought Fergus's reveal to Claire was handled well, though at first I yelled to my TV "they're not going to show that, are they?"  I felt terrible that he spent weeks suffering alone and blaming himself.  I hope at least that one of the servants tended to him, because he was probably injured in the process.  Jamie's rage was well done too.  
  • I loved the trial scene, especially the beautiful room in which it was held. (Does anyone know if it is patterned after a real room in Versailles?)  I was not expecting that abrupt end for St. Germain--I really thought he would last longer in the show and do more harm.  I liked that Claire tried to save him, but that Raymond sacrificed him to make the trial look legit. The actor did a great job of portraying the fear of knowing he was going to die.  
  • I wonder if we will hear more about Les Disciples?  It did appear that the St. Germain, King Louis, and the executioner were all part of that group. The king didn't seem to particularly enjoy the sex with Claire (as opposed to Jamie, whose first time with Claire was equally brief, but he seemed to really like it!) , so I assume that it was more a power play than anything else.  It makes me wonder about the role of Les Disciples and the reason for going about raping women (a maidenhead is the entry ticket to the group).  If it's just to show that they can do what they like, I wonder if BJR is part of that group too...If BJR is part of Les Disciples, the king's deliberate humiliation of him would have a different meaning, much like the way he allowed one of his fellow Disciples, St. Germain, to be executed.
  • Why is Jame's beard so big, but his hair is actually shorter than when he went to jail?
  • Agree with someone above who said this episode is all Claire/Caitriona.   
  • Love 2
Link to comment
19 minutes ago, ganesh said:

So daughter number 2 is the red haired woman from the 60s right? 

Wow!  Interesting!  She would know that Claire is her mother, but could not tell her for fear of changing Claire's actions.  If would make sacrificing her own life during the trial so that Claire could get away have a completely different significance. 

4 minutes ago, riverheightsnancy said:

You mean Gellis? I don't think that the math can work out, but maybe. Wouldn't Gellis be in her early 30s when she is in Scotland? She is not portrayed as a young woman (like early 20s). 

It depends on how long Geillis has been in the past.  The baby was born in 1948/1949, so she would be around 20 years old when Geillis went back through the stones.  However, if Geillis arrived in 1933, she would be 30 when she met Claire, so appropriate for the actress that played her.  

It would also explain why a woman from the 20th century was so concerned with the Jacobites.  Like her parents, she wanted to stop the destruction of the Scottish clans.  Claire and Jamie chose to try to stop the Jacobite uprising and, because she knew that approach didn't work, she chose to try to win it by raising money from the people (via Dougal) to support BPC.

I love your theory, Ganesh!  

  • Love 1
Link to comment
10 minutes ago, riverheightsnancy said:

I also cannot buy that Gellis is the daughter, because hey, wouldn't you recognize your own daughter? If they were separated at birth, sure, but I do not think the show is giving us those types of clues. 

It was 1945 Claire who went back in time.  She had not yet met her daughter, so she would not recognize her.  

I'm not saying that this theory is right, but I don't think we have seen anything to disprove it so far.

  • Love 1
Link to comment

Because Claire hasn't given birth to her when they first met in the past? Why would she recognize her? Gillis didn't tip her off because she wasnt in Claire's timeline yet. 

Gillis had been around for a while in Scotland before Claire arrived. 

She goes back in time in 1968 for example, around 18, and spends 7 years or so in Scotland before meeting Claire. So they're roughly the same age. 

It's not that preposterous, come on. 

  • Love 2
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, ganesh said:

It's not that preposterous, come on. 

Yeah, I forgot that she goes back before the birth, however, sometimes there is a family resemblance (within one's family) that people see and sense. And if this were true then Gellis would know. To me, the way she acts with Claire does not align with "I am your daughter", but rather "We have met in the future, but you don't know that yet" (it is coy).  I could be wrong, but I just don't see it. I still think that the actress is meant to be mid-30s and she just doesn't seem young enough to me. MMV

Link to comment

wow. my mind didn't even go to Gellis being Jamie + Claire's daughter. but as Ganesh and others pointed out it works so much and it would explain a lot. Like it's not just random people going through the stones and through time - but there's something about Claire (and by extension Gellis) that trigger the stones, and allow them to slip through time. why they both want to sacrifice everything to ensure that the Highlander way survives. Why Gellis sacrificed herself (as far as we know, did we ever find out if she survived or not? we went from there to Lallybrock relatively quickly if I remember rightly). 

but like someone said Gellis never treated Claire "Like. OMG! MA!" (but that could easily be handwaved). but I do think regardless if it's Gellis (the daughter) or Gellis (the future friend)... i can' wait to see that portrayed on television. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
(edited)

I'm totally saying Gellis knows her mother is Claire. Gellis is smart enough to play it cool. Her mother is from WWII: loose lips sink ships. 

Dramatically, the question would be if the daughter grows up to look like Gellis enough, that 1960s Claire recognizes her and directs her to go back in time to help 1940s Claire. 

I don't know how much the author has gotten into the timey whimey of it though. 

TV-wise, there has to be some logical endpoint to showing the flashforwards. I mean, it was reasoned out quick enough that Claire was on her second pregnancy when she returned to 1948, so it's not like showing the 1954 daughter now was like, "oh, mystery solved." Great, it confirms what we've inferred. So there got to be something more to it. 

Forget about Game of Thrones. J + C = G amirite?!

Edited by ganesh
  • Love 3
Link to comment

I cannot stand not knowing! argh. I feel like I want to go into the book thread to find out if it is true. I am not digging the Gellis is your daughter thing. I think part of it has to do with the actress and her age, but maybe the ages would be appropriate. I just have trouble seeing her as Claire's daughter, but that may be partly due to my perception that she should be younger I haven't actually figured out what the approximate timelines would be and/or ages. I guess that I often forget that there may be more time travelers and haven't extrapolated out those consequences as well. If I don't comment anymore, it will be because I went and found out. So, I don't want to spoil anyone, so I just won't comment at all on this topic if I do find out. :)

  • Love 1
Link to comment
3 hours ago, ganesh said:

Forget about Game of Thrones. J + C = G amirite?!

Having a stressful time right now, and that comment made me literally laugh out loud.  Thanks, I needed that!

Link to comment

Good episode.  CB did a marvelous job.  I'm glad that Claire owned up to her part (selfishness/unreasonableness) in some of the things that went wrong.  That went a long way in making me get behind the character 100% again.  It was sad about the little baby.  No one can say why little Faith was stillborn, there's too many things that could have gone wrong.  The best you can do is accept that bad things happen in life, pray that by the grace of God you'll be given another child, and do what Jamie and Claire did...move forward together bearing their grief.  I like to think that when babies are stillborn or die soon after birth that their little souls were just too pure and good for this world and angels have taken them back to Heaven.  I am so glad the Frasers are going back to Scotland.  I'm so over France and all things French (except Brouton.  Brouton can be smuggled into Scotland).  The king was a pig, plain and simple. St. Germain managed to make me feel somewhat bad for him at the end, what must it be like to know you're going to die like right now?  Not sure what the point of opening in 1954 was except to say, "hey!  Taurusrose, year of your birth!"  LOL  Did they have that color of nail polish back then?   

Link to comment

Because no one ever used a fake name before, so the whole theory is torpedoed. Hypothesis, actually. 

Claire tells young Briana the story. She falls in love with the Highlands. In an impetuous move she goes for the stones. She realizes she went too far back in time before her mother appeared and suddenly she realizes she is "gellis". 

That's a common plot in many time travel stories. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment

You are obviously entitled to your hypothesis.  :)  As anyone else is obviously entitled to disagree with it.  

I don't know if I would classify this hypothetical plot as "common" in time travel stories, as I haven't seen any statistics to back that up.  However, I agree that I have seen it before.  

Link to comment

I'll echo the praise for Cait in this episode. Her scene with Faith was unnervingly real and gutting.

And yaaaay, we're going back to Scotland! As much as I liked Raymond and Mother Hildegard, I haven't really taken to the Parisian characters and setting this season.

The theory of Gellis being Jamie and Claire's daughter is interesting, but the last time we saw Gellis, wasn't she in love with Dougal and carrying his child? I can't imagine that if Gellis = Brianna, she would knowingly hook up with her great-uncle. (Graham McTavish's foxiness and charm aside, ewww.)

Link to comment
20 hours ago, ganesh said:

Didn't Claire say she wanted to go back to Scotland? Are they bagging the plan to stop the battle? Seems kind of a waste given the enormous effort Jamie made to get into the confidence of Charlie. Not to mention he's leaving his cousin's business while he's absent. 

Yes, Claire said she wanted to go back to Scotland.  Good point about the cousin's business.  Maybe that will be addressed next episode?  I won't like it if it left unanswered.  

Maybe they think they've already stopped the battle since the BP lost his money with the hijacked wine shipment?  Did someone else already mention this?  If so, I apologize for being redundant.

Link to comment

I almost never cry at movies or TV and this episode made me cry.  The scenes where Fergus recounted his attack, and of course Claire with Faith, were just heart-wrenching.  They made me think of how I would feel if it were my child, and that's a tribute to amazing acting.  I've never seen the agony of dealing with a stillbirth presented that way or that well.  The death scene for the Comte was amazing acting, as well.  Too many times characters are either unrealistically stoic or maniacally hysterical when faced with death, and the pain and terror on the actor's face at the character's realization of what was about to happen was unbelievably difficult to watch, especially given that we've never been supposed to like the character.  I felt terrible for the character rather than any schadenfreude.

Have finally broken down and ordered a set of the books.  I don't know if it's better to stay spoiler-free and read them when the show is all over, or just start catching up and eventually moving over to the book talk folks.

  • Love 1
Link to comment

BJR - so basically if it moves... he will rape it?!?!  Wouldn't be surprised if he dabbled in beastality if he was out and about and just got the urge.  Man, I wish Claire just got a knife and ran it through him.  Or told the King and he issued the order to hang him. Or she could have given him something to make him impotent. Oh but we must think of Frank (sarcasm).

Claire in 1950's something looked beautiful.  Frank told her not to go looking for Jamie but he never said for her not to go back for her daughter. She could have went to France and revisited the grave.  

The King's quickie with Claire was laughable.  Not only is he have bowel movement issues but impotent issues as well. 

The "trial" was meh. But glad that the guy who assisted Claire got off. 

Link to comment

Oh, actually, I just realized. Claire didn't tell the king exactly what BJR did because she doesn't want him to die yet because of Frank. Lying back and thinking of England would have done the job just as well as far as he was concerned. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment

The point of the thing with the King is it is his way of showing potency and power, without allowing there to be a bunch of little bastards running around. It's a purely political act, not a pleasurable one as far as he's concerned.

Link to comment

Oh, right. Because if Claire is offering herself. I'm unraveling all that clothing. The king though, puts it in, and, thank you. Who is next and what do they want.

I just was so blinded by J + C = G. Sorry Hodor. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
11 hours ago, cattykit said:

Have finally broken down and ordered a set of the books.  I don't know if it's better to stay spoiler-free and read them when the show is all over, or just start catching up and eventually moving over to the book talk folks.

For what it's worth: I read the first book during the hiatus last year, so I knew what was coming in the second half.  While it didn't quite ruin the show for me, I realized afterward that I enjoyed the first half better not knowing what was coming.  I appreciated the show more for what it was and the story it told rather than getting caught up in the difference between the two.  YMMV.

  • Love 1
Link to comment

I thought it was one of the best scenes of the series. Hilarious, suspenseful, and dramatic. It really underscored the ramifications of Claire just being in the past, and how in over their heads they all are. Who knew the king had a secret room? What else is going on? 

I also liked, "Yup, I'm a white witch". The king looked like "oh damn, for real?"

  • Love 1
Link to comment
(edited)

Maybe someone could fill me in on this. Jamie had significantly thrust his sword into the crotch of Black Jack Randall, and I wondered how he would survive such a wound in the 1700's but also how he would manager to sire any children?

outlander-ep6-49-01.gif?w=618&h=347

Edited by HumblePi
Link to comment

I think that's the question we all have. 

Many have speculated that Frank isn't directly descended from BJR. Others have said that Claire disrupted the past enough that Frank has a new ancestor now.

If Claire is a fixed point in time, then it might not matter and Frank is always going to be born.

  • Love 1
Link to comment

I really wish they hadn't shown a closeup of baby Faiths toes when Clare was holding her. It was one large rubber piece with no separation of toes. The face looked good, but those toes killed the imagery for me and spoke to the reality that this show does use props sometimes that aren't altogether believable.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
On 5/23/2016 at 8:56 AM, RulerofallIsurvey said:

For what it's worth: I read the first book during the hiatus last year, so I knew what was coming in the second half.  While it didn't quite ruin the show for me, I realized afterward that I enjoyed the first half better not knowing what was coming.  I appreciated the show more for what it was and the story it told rather than getting caught up in the difference between the two.  YMMV.

 

that's hands down the reason why i won't read Outlander, and won't read Game of Thrones (even though my GoT friends said it should be safe now). I love not knowing what is going to happen, plus I love all you guys here trying to piece it out. 

  • Love 2
Link to comment
59 minutes ago, Daisy said:

that's hands down the reason why i won't read Outlander, and won't read Game of Thrones (even though my GoT friends said it should be safe now). I love not knowing what is going to happen, plus I love all you guys here trying to piece it out. 

That being said, I do love my episode spoilers.  :)  I would just rather not get too nit-picky.   I also enjoy the speculation.

I didn't read the Harry Potter books until right before the last movie came out.  And I read the 7th book before I saw the movie.  I liked them both, but remember being disappointed at some of the changes from the book to the movie, whereas when watching the earlier movies, I wasn't disappointed because I didn't know any better.  When I read the books afterward, it just enhanced the movie - filled in some blanks if you will - without taking pleasure away from the movie plot itself.  I may or may not do that with the Outlander books (read the second book after the end of Season 2, ex.)

Were I so inclined, I'd probably read some of the early GoT books now.  Of course, book 6 hasn't even been released yet, has it?  Lol.  Makes you wonder. (Makes me wonder, anyway.)  But I can barely keep up with the different plots watching the show.  I don't think I could handle the books.  :)

  • Love 1
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

That being said, I do love my episode spoilers.  :)  I would just rather not get too nit-picky.   I also enjoy the speculation.

I didn't read the Harry Potter books until right before the last movie came out.  And I read the 7th book before I saw the movie.  I liked them both, but remember being disappointed at some of the changes from the book to the movie, whereas when watching the earlier movies, I wasn't disappointed because I didn't know any better.  When I read the books afterward, it just enhanced the movie - filled in some blanks if you will - without taking pleasure away from the movie plot itself.  I may or may not do that with the Outlander books (read the second book after the end of Season 2, ex.)

Were I so inclined, I'd probably read some of the early GoT books now.  Of course, book 6 hasn't even been released yet, has it?  Lol.  Makes you wonder. (Makes me wonder, anyway.)  But I can barely keep up with the different plots watching the show.  I don't think I could handle the books.  :)

I tried a GoT audiobook. it's just like the show... ;) right over my head ;) 
no - I totally understand you. I am just.. I'm not adverse to spoilers. (not so much for television, I spoil myself for movies ALL the time - after the episode with Memoirs of a Geisha, I had to ;) ). but I always, always like the book more. (if I read it first) then the show is just lesser than. and I'd be loathe to do this to Outlander. 

Link to comment
On 5/23/2016 at 1:26 PM, toolazy said:

I'm interested what you non-book readers thought about the Star Chamber scene.  In Tom & Lorenzo's review, they are mostly WTF? What did you guys think?

I thought the acting by the guy playing the Comte was excellent.  Especially when he realized he was going to drink poison.  I thought the mini-flashback to Raymond putting the poison in the cup was a little ridiculous - they could have made it more vague the first time, and I think we viewers would have understood what happened from Claire's necklace changing.  Otherwise - it was pretty strange.  I guess.  The guards in masks was interesting - and a little creepy perhaps.  I'm not surprised that the king would have a secret chamber.  But why the guards in masks?  Unless it's the same reason as executioners used to wear them.  But for guy punishing the practice of dark arts, he sure had a supply of potions, etc, (and the snake!) nearby, huh? 

On 5/23/2016 at 1:34 PM, ganesh said:

I also liked, "Yup, I'm a white witch". The king looked like "oh damn, for real?"

I was a little shocked that Claire admitted that.  Especially after she berated Jamie for giving her La Dame Blanche name after nearly being burned as a witch in Scotland.  Besides, would they really know the difference - or care - between a 'white witch' and any other kind?

On 5/23/2016 at 3:32 PM, nachomama said:

I kept waiting for the King to let Jaime go because Jaime helped him poop that one time. Why give us that if it didn't pay off later?

I didn't even think of this until I saw someone mention it.  Good point though.  He should have already had the king's favor.  But then, maybe the king figured he paid him back for that by humiliating Randall in the garden.  I guess it's good to be the king.  

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...