S03.E01: The Battle Joined

[LadyChaos]

8 hours ago, AheadofStraight said:

If you really want to know....

  Reveal hidden contents

It's episode 6, and there is a 2 week hiatus between episode 5 and 6. It will air on 10/22.

I feel like what will happen is that she will be hesitant outside of the book shop, slightly panicking outside the door, and then pull herself together, push the door open, we hear the chime, and then fade to black.  Next episode picks up with the meeting.  It will kill us.

 

I couldn't find the original post, but I saw it attached to someone elses about 'wouldn't Claire have know about the practice in the time in regards to birth?"  Not necessarily.  In Europe, midwifery and home births without medications were still the norm until the mid to late 60's.  While in the U.S. hospital births were considered the norm, her original Dr may have known what she wanted, but it may not have occurred to her that this was the normal practice.

Edited September 12, 2017 by LadyChaos

[areca]

On 9/10/2017 at 2:13 PM, annlaw78 said:

It will be interesting to see how/if the show will keep audience interest by having so much focus on characters and events other than the central Claire-Jamie relationship.  I agree... I don't think the show really needs MORE Frank.  For those of us who haven't read all the books, Frank holds very little interest.  

I read the books after the first season specifically because I was horrified and wanted to be sure she made it home to Frank... I felt awful for them...

Edited September 12, 2017 by areca

[Indigo Luna]

10 hours ago, DittyDotDot said:

Father's actually had a great deal of power when it came to reproduction--more than the women. I have a friend whose family is quite large. When the fourth or fifth child was born, there were complications, so the mother asked the doctor to give her a hysterectomy--figuring they already had enough children and it would do no one any good for her to die in childbirth the next time. The doctor refused saying that it was up to her husband. Apparently, the health of the mother didn't matter as long as her husband wanted more children. This was in the early '70s, mind you. 

Hell, my mom needed to have a hysterectomy in the mid 90's due to health issues and her doctor pulled my dad aside and went through this whole thing about "if he really wants this" cause they only had one child and my dad had to sign a consent form in order for my mom to have the surgery. My dad willingly signed everything because he wasn't an asshole and my mom needed to have it done, but even he was floored that the doctor was like that. 

 

LOVED the premiere. So glad to have the show back its been far too long. 

[LadyChaos]

After I was born, the Dr gave my mother speed to help her lose weight.  He told her that my Dad wouldn't want her anymore otherwise, because she had gotten fat..... she was like 140lbs aftergiving birth.

[Nightshade]

I enjoyed it from start to finish especially Black Jack's death, so glad Outlander is finally back.

[Emily Thrace]

10 hours ago, qtpye said:

I was wondering the same thing.  As horrible as it seems to us today, it was seen as the safest way to handle birth at that time.

That said, as a woman, I felt horrible for Claire in that scene.  I hated that doctor more then the heavy handed Dean.

"Randall, you let your wife read newspapers...next thing you know she will want to go to Harvard Law School."

If they had made that character a touch more nuanced, it would have been more effective...it feels like the 18th century Scottish men were more pogressive.

To me the birth stuff was more annoying because it felt like it was pushing the authors agenda. That doctor was practically a cartoon. I'm sure  Diana thinks every woman should give birth at home with no pain relief or doctors at all. I don't think Twilight births were a good idea either but the whole Luddite western medicine/science is evil theme in these books is very OTT at times.

[Atlanta]

I had a high risk pregnancy (though I didn't know it--had pre-eclampsia like my mother). My regular OB/gyn (a woman) was on vacation. I know it was a life or death thing with us. I had my DD 10 weeks early. The dr who delivered her had ZERO bedside manner. However, now she's almost as tall as me and you'd never ever know she was a preemie (I was earlier than her). Sometimes you just have to trust the professionals even if they are d-bags. That doc, who is no longer with that practice, was douchey, but did know his stuff. After DD was over a year old and we knew weren't having any more babies and the DH met with a urologist about getting a vasectomy. He got the same come-to-Jesus lecture as a woman getting her tubes tied (different from a hysterectomy). From what I understand, that is removing your uterus. Usually a hysterectomy is for medical reasons and tubes tied is way easier. Basically, getting tubes tied vs. hysterectomy is a totally different procedure. Don't confuse the two.

Edited September 12, 2017 by Atlanta

[Dejana]

A few years ago, I read The American Way of Birth, which was written in the early 90s but delves into how US and UK childbirth practices diverged, with the US being more obstetrics-based in contrast to the prominence of midwifery in the UK. The author had given birth in both the US and UK in the 1930s/1940s and left her American friends baffled as she tried to explain using gas and air for pain relief during labor.  So, in addition to Claire being primarily a combat nurse and probably not having a lot of 20th century friends who were mothers, whatever familiarity she did have with modern childbirth may have been based on very different practices.

 

32 minutes ago, Emily Thrace said:

To me the birth stuff was more annoying because it felt like it was pushing the authors agenda. That doctor was practically a cartoon. I'm sure  Diana thinks every woman should give birth at home with no pain relief or doctors at all. I don't think Twilight births were a good idea either but the whole Luddite western medicine/science is evil theme in these books is very OTT at times.

The book actually makes it clear that Claire had a difficult pregnancy and feels that she and Bree would have died without modern science. IIRC, Voyager doesn't really get into what happened at the hospital beyond a passing mention of Frank adoring Bree the minute the nurse handed her to him. Someone saw the Season 3 birth interlude on Mad Men a few years back and took inspiration, I suspect.

Edited September 12, 2017 by Dejana

[Eureka]

44 minutes ago, Indigo Luna said:

Hell, my mom needed to have a hysterectomy in the mid 90's due to health issues and her doctor pulled my dad aside and went through this whole thing about "if he really wants this" cause they only had one child and my dad had to sign a consent form in order for my mom to have the surgery. My dad willingly signed everything because he wasn't an asshole and my mom needed to have it done, but even he was floored that the doctor was like that. 

Not exactly the same thing but to get a vasectomy, the wife needs to sign off on it. And that's in the 21st century.

[Atlanta]

In the book, IIRC, we don't get a lot of Brianna's birth other than it was a difficult pregnancy. It seemed heavy-handed via RDM with the douchey doctor. Not everything is SEXISM! Everything now is decried as sexism or racism. Don't be the boy who cried wolf. Yes, I'll call out d-bags, but it desensitizes true injustices.

Edited September 12, 2017 by Atlanta

[lianau]

44 minutes ago, Dejana said:

The book actually makes it clear that Claire had a difficult pregnancy and feels that she and Bree would have died without modern science. IIRC, Voyager doesn't really get into what happened at the hospital beyond a passing mention of Frank adoring Bree the minute the nurse handed her to him. Someone saw the Season 3 birth interlude on Mad Men a few years back and took inspiration, I suspect.

Later on (book 4 I think) Jamie and Claire have a discussion about their times of birth and that Claire doesn't know when she was born but knows Brianna's birth time down to the minute because she didn't want to be knocked out for the birth as she was afraid of dying .  Jamie can't understand this and says that he's never seen a woman give birth but heard enough of it to question why somebody would want to go through it if they don't have to . 

[Dejana]

37 minutes ago, lianau said:

Later on (book 4 I think) Jamie and Claire have a discussion about their times of birth and that Claire doesn't know when she was born but knows Brianna's birth time down to the minute because she didn't want to be knocked out for the birth as she was afraid of dying .  Jamie can't understand this and says that he's never seen a woman give birth but heard enough of it to question why somebody would want to go through it if they don't have to . 

I'm sure I'm just forgetting that scene but for some reason I had the idea that Claire needed a Caesarean. I think because one time she and Jamie were discussing his scars and he mentioned she had hers from Bree. Maybe he just meant stretch marks but since Claire did say it was a difficult pregnancy...

[mjforty]

On 9/10/2017 at 6:08 PM, Atlanta said:

Save Murtaugh! Why is anything 'mansplaining'? I know that's the term du jour, but I'm a woman who has read the books and had to explain some stuff to my husband. 

Mansplaining is not a man explaining something to a woman.  Mansplaining is when a man explains something to a woman that she already knows, oftentimes better than he does.  Like a man explaining the best way to return a serve to Serena Williams.  The professor was engaging in mansplaining because he was explaining to Claire that women weren't capable of handling the requirements of being a doctor as if he knew better than Claire what those requirements were despite the fact that he was only a history professor and Claire had beeen a combat nurse.  Therefore, if the roles had been reversed and your husband had had to explain some stuff to you about what was happening because he had read the books and you hadn't, that would not be mansplaining.  Mansplaining would be if your husband was contradicting you about what was going to happen in the episode even though he hadn't read the books and you had.

[Quinzee]

Is the site not recapping Outlander this year?

[Nidratime]

Since the show is going to have to shoehorn 20 years of both Jamie and Claire's life into just five episodes, we are clearly going to get "the greatest hits," i.e., the important moments that shaped their lives and decisions. It's probably going to look super dramatic to us, but the show doesn't have the luxury of covering everyday life, including the moments when Claire wasn't being patronized or she and Frank didn't have a little tension in the air. It's probably going to seem the same for Jamie, once they go through all he had to deal with in such a short amount of time. His storyline is probably going to feel like Job's.

Edited September 12, 2017 by Nidratime

[nodorothyparker]

If the show is going to insist on expanding Claire's nearly two decades with Frank rather than the few paltry flashbacks and greatest hits the books give us, it only makes sense it's going to also depict the reality of living in and eventually going to medical school in the '50s, which were downright regressive after the freer by necessity war years.  That's going to require some filling in around the edges.  Having heard enough stories from my grandmothers who would have been contemporaries of Claire's and my mother who was born the same year as Bree, none of this rings particularly false or over the top to me.  As presented, it's as much another layer of Claire's general unhappiness and sense of being out of place as anything else.

The books do occasionally venture pretty close to the land of holistic woo and I'll be the first to admit that I end up doing a lot of skimming when I find myself in the middle of another pages-long Miraculous Medical Marvel by Claire on some character who will probably disappear pages later, but I've never found them as a whole beating the all medical science is evil drum.  Like most sciences, medicine was an evolving thing and people did believe some pretty whacked out things over the centuries that if you're going to time travel you're probably going to encounter, whether it be bleeding out humors or twilight birth.  Some of those things did do a lot more harm than good.  One of the more amusing aspects of the later books for me is Claire figuring out how to use her "modern" scientific training to home brew things like penicillin and ether because she knows that shit works better than whatever bit of herb or moss or drilling holes in skulls that people had otherwise come up with. 

[cardigirl]

10 hours ago, Emily Thrace said:

To me the birth stuff was more annoying because it felt like it was pushing the authors agenda. That doctor was practically a cartoon. I'm sure  Diana thinks every woman should give birth at home with no pain relief or doctors at all. I don't think Twilight births were a good idea either but the whole Luddite western medicine/science is evil theme in these books is very OTT at times.

Pushing the agenda is how I felt about a Harvard professor tsk-tsking at Claire reading an article from the Globe.  

Quote

 

By the 1890s, The Boston Globe had become a stronghold, with an editorial staff dominated by Irish Catholics.[12]

In 1964, Tom Winship succeeded his father, Larry Winship, as editor. The younger Winship transformed The Globe from a mediocre local paper into a regional paper of national distinction.

 

He might have tsk-tsked the mediocrity of such a paper, but not the "liberalness" of it that the Globe is known for presently. 

3 hours ago, Quinzee said:

Is the site not recapping Outlander this year?

It seems they are not recapping anything, it's all podcasts.  Maybe they don't have anyone to podcast this show.  

[LadyChaos]

I suspect the timeline for the next few eps will be like this:

Spoiler

 

In 302in the next episode we will see Claire's decision to go to medical school and she and Frank arguing about it because he doesn't want her too, and Jamie living in the cave and getting himself turned in.

In 303: Claire will be in her internship meeting Joe Abernathy for the first time and the both of them dealing with being outcasts, and maybe she realizes Frank is cheating on her for the first time.  Jamie will be in Ardsmere prision and meeting LJG again.

304: Claire and Frank have their big blow out, he calls her a unfit mother and threatens to leave to London with Brie and then he has his stroke.  Jamie gets taken to the (I forget the family name) where he is enslaved for for his 7 years.

305:  We will see Claire in present day 60's finding out Jamie is still alive, going back to the States and meeting with Joe one last time.  I feel like this episode will end with her going back through the stones.  We will see Jamie setting up his 'interests' in Edinburgh. Which I'm slight disappointed in because in the books she see all that first hand through Claire after she has returned.

306: I think they will meet within the first 5 minutes and then all hell breaks loose.  

 

Edited September 12, 2017 by Athena
Added spoiler tags as this post includes future TV spoilers

[GHScorpiosRule]

4 minutes ago, LadyChaos said:

Claire and Frank have their big blow out, he calls her a unfit mother and threatens to leave to London with Brie and then he has his stroke.

Frank didn't die of a stroke; he died in a car accident.

[Juliegirlj]

Loved the way they depicted the battle scenes, but, that strange exchange between Jamie and BJR where they almost  embraced was unsettling and seemed to imply an emotional connection between them- obviously written by someone who doesn't understand rape. 

Fare thee well, Rupert. You died with dignity like a true Scotsman !!! ?

The scene with Jamie at the stones right after Claire went through was weird- I love that they included it but Jamie looked more angry than devastated. 

It is likely that Claire's had little experience with childbirth- perhaps during nurses training, delivering Jenny's bairn and her own stillbirth. Scopalomine medicated ( twilight sleep) births were the norm at that time. 

So Murtagh lived based on the rule of tv ( didn't die if they didn't show it). 

[WatchrTina]

12 hours ago, nodorothyparker said:

One of the more amusing aspects of the later books for me is Claire figuring out how to use her "modern" scientific training to home brew things like penicillin and ether because she knows that shit works better than whatever bit of herb or moss or drilling holes in skulls that people had otherwise come up with. 

That reminds me.  Did I see Claire drilling a hole in someone's skull with a hand-drill in the opening credits?  if so, that's new.  I don't remember a trepanning scene in the books.  Also, ew. I guess the show-runners felt they needed a gross-out medical procedure scene to keep with tradition (remember the sewing-up-Jamie's-side scene in the original opening credits?)

12 hours ago, Juliegirlj said:

that strange exchange between Jamie and BJR where they almost  embraced was unsettling and seemed to imply an emotional connection between them- obviously written by someone who doesn't understand rape. 

I also found those scenes disturbing.  Someone once said "There's a fine line between love and hate."  I think it's pretty clear that in Jamie's case, that is not true.  He wants to kill BJR with all his heart and soul.  But when he first sees BJR I can imagine that he feels a rush of "joy" (for lack of a better word) at the prospect that he might be able to send BJR to the devil before facing what he assumes is his own inevitable death. The desire for vengeance is powerful motivator to a Highlander and I think that's how Sam played it but that "joy" on his face could be confusing to some viewers.  In the case of BJR I think it's a lot less clear what he is feeling.  That fine line between love and hate is a lot thinner for him.  That dungeon scene back in Book 1 where he caresses Jamie and calls him "Alex" and asks him to say "I love you" are a quick look into the black soul of that man (at least the book version) and quite frankly I have no idea what mixed-up emotions are lurking there.  I like to think that he "admires" Jamie (for lack of a better word) as the best adversary he ever took down coupled with a longing for "the one that got away."  Remember that not only did Jamie survive BJR's torture -- he went on to thrive, rising to a position of wealth and honor in Paris (where Jack last saw him in the show-verse) AND Jamie bested Jack in a duel -- gelding him in the process. So I think Jack also feels "joy" at the prospect of getting to finish what he started so long ago.  He's delighted at the opportunity for a re-match so that he can avenge the loss from that duel in Paris and he's excited at the prospect of being the one to "end" James Fraser.  But he also has some weird feelings of admiration and intimacy mixed up in there too.

I do not envy those actors having to convey all that subtext while also dodging horses and swinging broadswords.

Edited September 13, 2017 by WatchrTina

[nodorothyparker]

4 minutes ago, WatchrTina said:

That reminds me.  Did I see Claire drilling a hole in someone's skull with a hand-drill in the opening credits?  if so, that's new.  I don't remember a trepanning scene in the books.  Also, ew. I guess the show-runners felt they needed a gross-out medical procedure scene to keep with tradition (remember the sewing-up-Jamie's-side scene in the original opening credits?)

I wondered what that scene was too but I don't want to know bad enough to go back and rewatch it close up to try to figure it out.  Less really is more on the bloody stuff for me.

The only trepanning I can remember from the books off the top of my head is the one done to Lord John at the end of DOA and Claire doesn't perform it.  She's clearly fascinated by it though.

[FnkyChkn34]

13 hours ago, LadyChaos said:

I feel like what will happen is that she will be hesitant outside of the book shop, slightly panicking outside the door, and then pull herself together, push the door open, we hear the chime, and then fade to black.  Next episode picks up with the meeting.  It will kill us.

This is what I was thinking too.  Or how Jamie says, "[What's-his-name], is that you?" without Jamie turning around.

[GHScorpiosRule]

13 hours ago, Biggie B said:

I assumed that Claire would be, and knew as soon as it was established that the doctor was her usual doctor, that there'd be a problem.

I'm not sure if you mean had her regular doctor shown up, there would be a problem, or if you mean you knew there'd be a problem as soon as this jerkwad of a doctor showed up and told Claire that she would be put under and to have a nice sleep. Because he wasn't her doctor. Her regular doctor was Dr. Bell, I think.

[Nidratime]

Quote

That reminds me.  Did I see Claire drilling a hole in someone's skull with a hand-drill in the opening credits?  if so, that's new.  I don't remember a trepanning scene in the books.  Also, ew. I guess the show-runners felt they needed a gross-out medical procedure scene to keep with tradition (remember the sewing-up-Jamie's-side scene in the original opening credits?)

It's possible it's something Claire is doing during her medical training, hopefully with a cadaver.

[Biggie B]

5 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

13 hours ago, Biggie B said:

I assumed that Claire would be, and knew as soon as it was established that the doctor was her usual doctor, that there'd be a problem.

I'm not sure if you mean had her regular doctor shown up, there would be a problem, or if you mean you knew there'd be a problem as soon as this jerkwad of a doctor showed up and told Claire that she would be put under and to have a nice sleep. Because he wasn't her doctor. Her regular doctor was Dr. Bell, I think.

Eeek, my bad - in my original post, it should have read "...as soon as it was established that the doctor WASN'T her usual doctor..."  

Meaning, as soon as I saw and heard the jerkwad doctor, I knew things wouldn't go well (which, all things considered, they actually did, as little baby Bree ended up arriving just fine, and Claire, too, seemed to be OK).

[GHScorpiosRule]

I'm not trusting the opening credits, because they bait and switched me last season! I remember seeing what I thought was Jamie's healed hand, fingers wiggling, but did we get to see his reaction to his hand being healed? His grateful tears as he thanked Claire? No. I we did not!

[morgan]

Speaking of the opening credits, I would have loved a quick shot of Jamie unzipping a zipper....

[annlaw78]

4 hours ago, cardigirl said:

Pushing the agenda is how I felt about a Harvard professor tsk-tsking at Claire reading an article from the Globe.  

Harvard, that famed bastion of Republicanism... (sarcasm)

[AheadofStraight]

4 hours ago, LadyChaos said:

I suspect the timeline for the next few eps will be like this:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

In 302in the next episode we will see Claire's decision to go to medical school and she and Frank arguing about it because he doesn't want her too, and Jamie living in the cave and getting himself turned in.

In 303: Claire will be in her internship meeting Joe Abernathy for the first time and the both of them dealing with being outcasts, and maybe she realizes Frank is cheating on her for the first time.  Jamie will be in Ardsmere prision and meeting LJG again.

304: Claire and Frank have their big blow out, he calls her a unfit mother and threatens to leave to London with Brie and then he has his stroke.  Jamie gets taken to the (I forget the family name) where he is enslaved for for his 7 years.

305:  We will see Claire in present day 60's finding out Jamie is still alive, going back to the States and meeting with Joe one last time.  I feel like this episode will end with her going back through the stones.  We will see Jamie setting up his 'interests' in Edinburgh. Which I'm slight disappointed in because in the books she see all that first hand through Claire after she has returned.

306: I think they will meet within the first 5 minutes and then all hell breaks loose.  

 

The episode descriptions were released and some sites still have them - Starz made some sites take them down.

Here is one site where I still see them: http://outlander.wikia.com/wiki/Season_Three

[FnkyChkn34]

Can someone please refresh my memory - do we like Matthew B. Roberts' writing?  Do we like his episodes?

[taanja]

1 hour ago, morgan said:

Speaking of the opening credits, I would have loved a quick shot of Jamie unzipping a zipper....

The modern zipper-- as we know it --wasn't perfected until 1913. So in Jamie's time -- zippers do NOT exist.

[morgan]

4 minutes ago, taanja said:

The modern zipper-- as we know it --wasn't perfected until 1913. So in Jamie's time -- zippers do NOT exist.

Yes but wasn't there one on Claire's dress?  

[nodorothyparker]

Yes, there is a zipper on the dress Claire returns to the past in.  Book Jamie doesn't know what to make of it.  And then we never hear of it ever again.

[FnkyChkn34]

13 minutes ago, morgan said:

Yes but wasn't there one on Claire's dress?  

Yep, exactly.  And he was very perplexed... ;-)

[GHScorpiosRule]

59 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

Can someone please refresh my memory - do we like Matthew B. Roberts' writing?  Do we like his episodes?

I think we do. Here are the episodes he wrote in the first two seasons:

 

- Dragonfly in Amber (2016) 

- Je Suis Prest (2016)

- Best Laid Schemes... (2016) 

- The Search (2015) ... 

- The Reckoning (2015) ... 

- The Gathering (2014) ... 

[FnkyChkn34]

32 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

I think we do. Here are the episodes he wrote in the first two seasons:

 

- Dragonfly in Amber (2016) 

- Je Suis Prest (2016)

- Best Laid Schemes... (2016) 

- The Search (2015) ... 

- The Reckoning (2015) ... 

- The Gathering (2014) ... 

Thanks!  I agree, I think we do. :-) 

[qtpye]

I'm disspointed.  I do not want to se five episodes of this depressing marriage.  I was all caught up at the end of last season.  Claire became a doctor, she was a distant parent, and she kept on loving Jaimie, while Frank kept on loving her, and Frank was the better parent..

Did not need to see this rehashed.

Edited September 12, 2017 by qtpye

[GHScorpiosRule]

5 minutes ago, qtpye said:

I'm disspointed.  I do not want to se five episodes of this depressing marriage.  I was all caught up at the end of last season.  Claire became a doctor, she was a distant parent, and she kept on loving Jaimie, while Frank kept on loving her, and Frank was the better parent..

Did not need to see this rehashed.

But @qtpye! Tobias Menzies!!!! ???

Edited September 12, 2017 by GHScorpiosRule

[qtpye]

I love TM, but do not want to see him as a sad sack lovelorn husband who no longer understands his wife.  The writing will needs to be strong not to make this tedious.

Edited September 12, 2017 by qtpye

[ElsieH]

Does anyone else think it a little odd that the guy talking to Jamie in the cottage is someone we had never seen before? I guess there really wasn't anyone else we "knew" but I spent a lot of those scenes wondering who he was and how he knew Jamie that well (knew Claire, etc). It would have been perfect if it had been Willie I think, too bad they shipped him to the colonies last season.

[FnkyChkn34]

1 minute ago, qtpye said:

I love TM, but do not want to see him as a sad sack lovelorn husband who no longer understands his wife.  The writing will need to be strong not to make this tedious.

I'm with you, but I'm also not much of a TM fan.  I'm sure people will want to throw stones, but I see nothing special about him.  ::shrug::

I'm hoping we will see him as a cheating philanderer so we can truly all just hate Frank and move on after episode 5.

2 minutes ago, ElsieH said:

Does anyone else think it a little odd that the guy talking to Jamie in the cottage is someone we had never seen before? I guess there really wasn't anyone else we "knew" but I spent a lot of those scenes wondering who he was and how he knew Jamie that well (knew Claire, etc). It would have been perfect if it had been Willie I think, too bad they shipped him to the colonies last season.

Do you mean Rupert?

[GHScorpiosRule]

6 minutes ago, ElsieH said:

Does anyone else think it a little odd that the guy talking to Jamie in the cottage is someone we had never seen before? I guess there really wasn't anyone else we "knew" but I spent a lot of those scenes wondering who he was and how he knew Jamie that well (knew Claire, etc). It would have been perfect if it had been Willie I think, too bad they shipped him to the colonies last season.

That was...Killick, and no, we hadn't seen him before this.  They shipped Willie off due to the actor's unavailability; but then again, in the buik, it was Willie who witnessed Jamie killing Dougal.

5 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

I'm with you, but I'm also not much of a TM fan.  I'm sure people will want to throw stones, but I see nothing special about him.  ::shrug::

I'm hoping we will see him as a cheating philanderer so we can truly all just hate Frank and move on after episode 5.

Neither am I. He was a whiny sad sack as Brutus in HBO's Rome. He's okay, but I'm certainly not squeeing over him. I save all my squeeing for ❤️?❤️??Sam.??❤️?❤️

Wot?

6 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

Do you mean Rupert?

No, there was another clean shaven Highlander sitting beside Jamie; the guy who kissed Jamie's hand before he volunteered to be killed next.

Edited September 12, 2017 by GHScorpiosRule

[ElsieH]

9 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

I'm with you, but I'm also not much of a TM fan.  I'm sure people will want to throw stones, but I see nothing special about him.  ::shrug::

I'm hoping we will see him as a cheating philanderer so we can truly all just hate Frank and move on after episode 5.

Do you mean Rupert?

No, I meant that Killick guy. I knew the actor for Willie was not around last season so they wrote him out. It just seemed odd there isn't one other named character we had left after the Lallybroch men were sent home. Or was he in fact there last season and I don't remember him?

Edited September 12, 2017 by ElsieH

[GHScorpiosRule]

2 minutes ago, ElsieH said:

No, I meant that Killick guy. I knew the actor for Willie was not around last season so they wrote him out. It just seemed odd there isn't one other named character we had left after the Lallybroch men were sent home. Or was he in fact there last season and I don't remember him?

Nope. He wasn't on last season. I remember thinking, who is this person talking with Rupert and sitting beside Jamie?

[FnkyChkn34]

8 minutes ago, ElsieH said:

No, I meant that Killick guy. I knew the actor for Willie was not around last season so they wrote him out. It just seemed odd there isn't one other named character we had left after the Lallybroch men were sent home. Or was he in fact there last season and I don't remember him?

Gotcha, sorry.  I agree, but I guess I just handwaved that and assumed he was a Lallybroch man that we hadn't seen before, so he was a pseudo-stand in for the other two that were there last season?  But then again, Murtagh said all Lallybroch men made it home, so I don't know...

[Nidratime]

Quote

No, I meant that Killick guy. I knew the actor for Willie was not around last season so they wrote him out. It just seemed odd there isn't one other named character we had left after the Lallybroch men were sent home. Or was he in fact there last season and I don't remember him?

I was okay with it because I thought it would be awfully coincidental that all or the majority of men that survived the battle just happened to be people Jamie knew well. There were plenty that he didn't and so I didn't expect that everyone in that crofters cottage would be known to us either.

[ElsieH]

One more thing that bugs me. I also didn't like the huggy stuff going on with Jamie and Jack at the battle. And there's all this talk of great sunsets. But the battle was supposed to have been only about 15 minutes right? So no sunset, which means they just did it for effect.  It does help that I don't get the impression Diana was in agreement with the whole emotional romance-y vibe of it all, just from looking at her Twitter feed. 

Other than that, I did like it. I'll just be glad that Jack is dead. Although I wonder what the folks who are saying this is some epic connection between them and wondering if Jamie is bi will think of they leave in his offer to lord John. 

[Atlanta]

1 hour ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

That was...Killick, and no, we hadn't seen him before this.  They shipped Willie off due to the actor's unavailability; but then again, in the buik, it was Willie who witnessed Jamie killing Dougal.

Maybe Willie will pop up in America!! I liked the actor.

[Petunia846]

1 hour ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

But @qtpye! Tobias Menzies!!!! ???

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!