S03.E02: Surrender

[Athena]

Quote

Hiding in an isolated cave, Jamie leads a lonely life until Lallybroch is threatened by redcoats pursuing the elusive Jacobite traitor known as “Red Jamie.” Back in Boston, Claire and Frank struggle to coexist in a marriage haunted by the ghost of Jamie’s love.

Reminder: The is the book talk thread. This can include spoilers for ALL the books. If you wish to remain unspoiled about any of the books, please leave now and head to the No Book Talk episode thread.

[areca]

Christ Jesus.  This entire episode was just gut wrenching.

[Quickbeam]

Whew. You can tell yourself it is all CGI but yikes, looked real (Fergus' hand). I loved wild man Jamie....it all looked. Fantastic. Super work on textiles and fabrics, especially for the 1949 bits. 

[Cloudberryjam]

Loved: Fergus! Sam did a fine job as empty shell of Jamie...

Did not love: Claire and Frank lots o sex 

What is with that Scottish Redcoat? 

New Mantra: 3 more til printshop, 3 more til printshop

[ElsieH]

So, if the boys saw the raven wouldn't they have just thrown a rock at it? I also hated the wig and beard for Jamie that was a bit ridiculous.

I did love fergus though. Amazing how. He seems much older than he was last season even though it hasn't been six years.

[Petunia846]

I thought they did a great job with Jamie as the wild man, lost and alone. The hair and the beard worked for me, as did the ratty clothes, and even Sam's posture and flat affect. (It did seem like he spent a bit too much time outside the cave during daylight hours, but I'll forgive them for what was likely a filming constraint.) Loved seeing the three boys together and life in general at Lallybroch. Though now that I think of it, if this was the birth of Wee Ian, where were all the other kids Jenny and Ian had in between him and Wee Jamie? Off playing with Mrs. Crook the whole time?

We see a slashed wall hanging (family crest?) from the red coats searching the house, but in the book it's an actual wall panel that's slashed, and it serves as a reminder even in the future of what happened. Perhaps we'll eventually see the wall under the wall hanging and that'll be the slashed wall like in the book?

Loved the start of Claire's medical school experience and our introduction to Joe.

Edited September 17, 2017 by Petunia846

[Rilla-my-Rilla]

So, even though I knew nothing happened to baby Young Ian, I still was having M*A*S*H flashbacks something terrible. 

"You made me do this. I'll never ever forgive you for this!!" So sad. ?

I wonder will have any repercussions for Jenny/Lallybroch turning Jamie in instead of a group set up with some neighbors. But probably, it'll never be brought up again.

[morgan]

Wow!  I am blown away by this episode.  I snuck-watched this morning but will "real" watch it tonight with my husband.  Am curious to see what he as a non book reader thinks of it.  Jenny was amazing in that final scene where she was yelling at Jamie.  Between that and the bagpipes as Claire walked by I was in tears, something that didn't happen last episode surprisingly.  And even knowing all that comes after, watching Jamie bundled into that carriage with the bars just killed me.

i have zero complaints with the changes they made or really anything.  And I think they are doing a fabulous job showing Claire and Franks's marriage.  I have no problems with their sex life shown, they had an active and good sex life prior to Jamie and Claire is a sexual being.  I loved how they showed the problems with it though, and that Frank is crushed by the knowledge that even with him, she thinks of Jamie.  I know there are a lot of Frank haters, but I have always hurt for him.  

Loved how they showed in just a short scene how hard her oath to becoming a dr would be.  Love that they professor almost seems eye rollingly over the top with his prejudice until I remember I am looking at him through a modern lens.  I have no doubt this and worse happened to many generations of non white/non male students.  Loved meeting Joe!!!!

Mary was perfect.  

Really just a wonderful episode.  Can't wait to watch again.

[Petunia846]

Realized on rewatch that while both Claire and Jamie have sex with other people, neither one of them can look at the other person. The bit where Jamie and Mary are talking about it and he says it's what he always does and then starts crying was so sad. Also, in the first sexy scene where Claire is in bed thinking of Jamie (!!!), when we see her, it's her gold ring that we can see on the hand clutching the pillow. It's somewhat coincidental given the hands she wears them on and her position in bed, but I still thought it was a nice touch.

I also loved that they kept the conversation between Jamie and Fergus after the incident pretty much intact from the books. Such good lines from Fergus.

Also also, that scene where Ian compares the pain of a phantom limb to the pain of Jamie missing Claire who was his heart. *sobs*

Edited September 17, 2017 by Petunia846

[ElsieH]

2 hours ago, Petunia846 said:

Realized on rewatch that while both Claire and Jamie have sex with other people, neither one of them can look at the other person. The bit where Jamie and Mary are talking about it and he says it's what he always does and then starts crying was so sad. Also, in the first sexy scene where Claire is in bed thinking of Jamie (!!!), when we see her, it's her gold ring that we can see on the hand clutching the pillow. It's somewhat coincidental given the hands she wears them on and her position in bed, but I still thought it was a nice touch.

I also loved that they kept the conversation between Jamie and Fergus after the incident pretty much intact from the books. Such good lines from Fergus.

Also also, that scene where Ian compares the pain of a phantom limb to the pain of Jamie missing Claire who was his heart. *sobs*

Oh, I really liked that line from Ian also. Was that in the book? I don't recall.

One other thing I noticed, is that Romann got really tall in the offseason (not that it would take much to be taller than Jenny ha ha)! Still not quite convinced he was as young as he was supposed to be last season or as old as he is supposed to be in this episode, but I love him so much that I don't care. I will miss him, I guess that is the last time we see this Fergus. I hope the new Fergus is as good.

ETA: I guess we didn't get any recounting to Jenny about what may have happened to Murtagh. I really hope we find out at some point, and honestly as much as I would miss him, I hope he is dead. I think it would be too convenient for him to find out his closest companion also survived Culloden, not to mention how on earth could he have, when they were killing everyone. Where would he hide? How would he get away? Why wouldn't he have lived with Jamie in the cave or had any contact with him?

Edited September 17, 2017 by ElsieH

[nodorothyparker]

Good episode but it kind of defeats the whole point of the dun bonnet to have the long straggly red hair hanging out of it so you're still instantly recognizable.

Watching this on my computer with the episode timer right there, I clocked it at being more than 16 minutes in before Jamie ever had a single line of dialogue. Dun bonnet quibble aside, his silence really played in very nicely with the actor's stiff and slightly hunched posture and rather flat affect when he did speak to give us our first look at the terribly muted and withdrawn into himself character we meet in Voyager.  In previous seasons, I've found the actor playing Ian and his characterization competent enough although he wasn't really grabbing me compared to the completely spot-on Jenny we've gotten every time out.  There was something that was really working for me this go round though in his general affability in the face of having his home invaded by soldiers again and being dragged off to lockup yet again, even if I can't quite put my finger on it.  It wasn't book Ian frankly assessing that Jamie would likely prefer to be dead having lost Claire and a possible limb too, but he was still rather astute in understanding that with everything lost and Claire gone, Jamie was missing too much of himself to go on as he was.  

The show didn't come any closer than the book did in helping me understand why with the family barely holding it together to keep everybody fed while the redcoats were still regularly showing up to terrorize them as her brother hides out in a cave one step above being an animal that Jenny would possibly think it's a good idea to be pushing Jamie to remarry or create more mouths to feed.    I get that she sees that he's lonely and not doing so well on his own, but realistically how would she have seen that playing out?  Would she have expected Mary McNabb to be sneaking off to the cave for regular sex or take any resulting children to visit?  How would they have explained to outsiders who they were?  It always bugs in the book.  Fergus's maiming feels a little more out of left field here too when you remove the whole part of the leap of the cask story and ends up looking just like another bastard redcoat being a bastard.  The calling out of the Scottish soldier didn't really land either in demonstrating that there were quite a few Scots in the British army before and after the Rising or why because the show didn't really do the groundwork last season of even making it clear that Scotland was not united in that effort.

Claire couldn't have been much more obvious in her line "I miss my husband" that she didn't mean Frank or in her initiating sex that it was more about getting her rocks off than it was anything to do with him.  Frank was clearly crushed by that realization as well.  I did have to chuckle at the 1950s twin bed set at the end and wondered which one of them made the ultimate call on that.  The bagpiper at the end tying everything together was a nice touch, but I'm really ready to move on to the '60s hunt for Jamie through the historical records.  That's something that feels like it should be really dry on the page but isn't.

[WatchrTina]

My immediate reaction (without looking at anyone else's posts) OH!  MY EYES!  Seeing Claire and Frank knocking boots is just SO WRONG.  Seeing Jamie and anyone but Claire is just SO WRONG.  But then the episode is saved by the fact that neither Jamie nor Claire can bear to to look either.

The bagpipes at the end -- just gutting.

Okay, off to watch again (thank you, thank you, thank you STARZ for making this available on demand on Sunday mornings.)

[Eureka]

What happened to the baby girl (I forget the name) of Jenny's that Claire delivered? I don't remember from the books, did she die? They show Young Jamie but not her in this episode.

And omg, I knew it was coming, but poor Fergus.

The last scene at supposed Harvard took me right out of it. I think even in the 50s there were many more buildings in Harvard Square than that open area they showed. Cambridge is not that spread out.

Edited September 17, 2017 by Eureka

[Petunia846]

14 minutes ago, Eureka said:

What happened to the baby girl (I forget the name) of Jenny's that Claire delivered? I don't remember from the books, did she die? They show Young Jamie but not her in this episode.

She lived, Maggie. In the books Jenny and Ian have 7 kids, Young Jamie, Margaret, Katherine, Caitlin (who died as a baby), Michael, Janet, and Ian. So Maggie has disappeared and we've skipped four whole pregnancies and misplaced the resulting children. I was really confused about that. Not even a comment about Mrs. Crook watching them or something.

Wait do we see both Maggie and Katherine born on the show? Maggie is the one Claire delivers in S1, right? She was breech and it's when Jenny gives the description of being pregnant. The Katherine is the tiny baby Jamie talks to when they come back after France before the rising, right? I'm so confused about the kids now. So we skipped three pregnancies?

ETA: Wait, Michael and Janet were twins, so we skipped them and Caitlin. Two pregnancies.

Edited September 17, 2017 by Petunia846

[nodorothyparker]

They may be reducing the number of kids for the show or maybe they're all off in the kitchen with Mrs. Crook and they just didn't mention it.  Since most of them don't really figure in the future plot in any significant way beyond the occasional snide comment by various British, including John Grey, about the Scottish reproducing like rabbits or later the crowd of teens/young adults hanging around Lollybroch, they probably figure it doesn't matter.  It happens quite a bit in TV/film adaptations.

I don't doubt the show isn't expecting at least some fan backlash from our leads hitting it with other people.  They did a good job though of making it more sad and lonely than anything resembling sexy though, so kudos for managing that tonally.

[Eureka]

1 minute ago, nodorothyparker said:

They may be reducing the number of kids for the show or maybe they're all off in the kitchen with Mrs. Crook and they just didn't mention it.  Since most of them don't really figure in the future plot in any significant way beyond the occasional snide comment by various British, including John Grey, about the Scottish reproducing like rabbits or later the crowd of teens/young adults hanging around Lollybroch, they probably figure it doesn't matter.  It happens quite a bit in TV/film adaptations.

I don't doubt the show isn't expecting at least some fan backlash from our leads hitting it with other people.  They did a good job though of making it more sad and lonely than anything resembling sexy though, so kudos for managing that tonally.

I could understand that if they didn't already show Maggie's (or Katherine's?) pregnancy and birth two seasons ago. When Jamie said he'll introduce the baby to his brother, it reminded me there should be a sister too.

[Atlanta]

45 minutes ago, nodorothyparker said:

They may be reducing the number of kids for the show or maybe they're all off in the kitchen with Mrs. Crook and they just didn't mention it.  Since most of them don't really figure in the future plot in any significant way beyond the occasional snide comment by various British, including John Grey, about the Scottish reproducing like rabbits or later the crowd of teens/young adults hanging around Lollybroch, they probably figure it doesn't matter.  It happens quite a bit in TV/film adaptations.

I don't doubt the show isn't expecting at least some fan backlash from our leads hitting it with other people.  They did a good job though of making it more sad and lonely than anything resembling sexy though, so kudos for managing that tonally.

I thought Jenny mentioned that Mrs Crook passed and Mary McNab had taken her post.

[nodorothyparker]

3 minutes ago, Atlanta said:

I thought Jenny mentioned that Mrs Crook passed and Mary McNab had taken her post.

Just went back and checked and you're right.  She did.  So who knows about any of this?

[Petunia846]

La la la...oh well. I hope we still get Janet at least. Her scenes with Ian are so funny when Jamie and Claire bring him home from Edinburgh.

[toolazy]

Just because they didn't show a bunch of little kids doesn't mean that the kids don't exist.  I imagine that it's probably a production headache to deal with a huge mess of kids so I don't really have a problem with them staying offscreen.  Especially since they are all little - Young Jamie is the oldest. 

[WatchrTina]

THE GOOD

Silent, emotionally shut-down Jamie worked well for me.  I found it very satisfying to watch “our” Jamie begin to emerge from behind that wall of grief (and hair.)  Fergus speaks for us all when he says “There you are milord.”

That vision of Claire that Jamie had when brought in the deer – damn that was heart-breaking (in a good way.)

On the other hand, Claire’s masturbatory visions of Jamie – damn.  That was simultaneously heartbreaking and disturbingly hot.  (BTW does anyone else think those visions were all out-takes from the wedding episode?)

When Frank takes Brianna and says “Come to Daddy and give us a kiss” she puts her pudgy little baby hand up as if to say “No! You’re not my daddy!”  Attagirl Bree!

I watched the show on my computer wearing noise-cancelling headphones so you can really hear all the subtle sounds.  It is so jarring (in a well-done and dramatic way) to cut from the scene with Claire, Frank & Bree (with 1949 music playing in the background) to a close-up on Jamie’s feet hearing nothing but his quiet footsteps and the sounds of nature as he walks through the 18th century forest.

I loved that Rabbie McNab, who we saw as a wee boy in season 1, is in this episode.  He’s grown MUCH taller  -- as has wee Jamie – which helps show the passage of time and he even mentions Granny McNab (who told him that ravens are messengers of death and canna be near the house during a birth.)

Jenny’s newborn baby (young Ian!) was so adorable it made my womb ache.

Did you notice Jenny having a nice post-childbirth dram of whiskey?  I love Jenny.

Did you notice that Jenny hears baby Ian’s wee cry while Jamie is hiding with him but the Redcoat captain does not?  A mother’s ears are keen for the cry of her own babe, ye ken.

Did you notice how Mary MacNab enters with the pistol held cupped in her open hands so that nobody thinks she’s armed and shoots her by mistake?  I just love those little notes of realism that underscore the ever-present danger and risk of violence in the conditions under which they are living.

I do love the change vs. the book whereby Mary takes the fall for having a gun and shooting the raven.  It fleshes out her character and makes her a heroine in our eyes (so I don’t have to hate her later when she offers herself to Jamie.)

Also nice work by the writers putting an unfriendly Scottish Redcoat in the room who can vouch for the Highlander’s superstitious fear of ravens near a birth.  The show version of that whole sequence actually worked better than the frightening but also-somewhat-comic scene in the book where Jamie is crouched in the wardrobe with the baby sucking on his finger with increasing frustration while Jenny’s other children all keen and wail at the news that the baby has died.

Oooh they used the noise of the stones at Craigh na Dun to kick off that scene when Claire wakes Frank up and has sex with him.  What a wonderfully creepy way to signal Jamie’s presence in Claire’s mind at that moment.  “What is it?” he asks.  “I miss my husband,” she replies.  Damn Claire, that is an ice-cold double entendre.

The scene of Jamie’s breakdown after Fergus is attacked is shot through the back of the fire-place.  I loved that.

I absolutely hated the Claire/Frank sex scene in front of the fire.  That’s actually a good thing.  I’m strictly #TeamJamie so my having a strong negative reaction is (I presume) exactly what the show runners were going for.  I also loved the way that that scene (which ends badly when Claire refuses to open her eyes and look at Frank) is later echoed in Jamie’s closed-eye kiss of Mary MacNab.

Oh God.  The tears in Jamie’s eyes when he kisses Mary.  Heart = breaking.

BTW they did a great job casting Mary MacNab.  Her physical similarities to Claire make it all the easier for the viewer to “forgive” Jamie (stupid word but I can’t think of a better) for his accepting the gift that Mary has offered him.

Hey, the Claire voice-over is back!  I know some people don’t like it but I don’t mind it. It’s an effective way to move the story along when they don’t have time to show us everything.

I just loved watching Cait’s face as she plays Claire encountering the prejudice she will face non-stop as a female medical student.  She and Sam both are just so good with those subtle reactions.  We’re so lucky to have those two as our leads in this show.

Claire meets Joe Abernathy.  This looks like the beginning of a beautiful friendship.

That last look between Jamie and Jenny before he is put in the wagon.  Heart = breaking.

OMG – Scotland the Brave on bagpipes as Jamie is carried away.  That’s almost cruel.  We the viewers are right there sharing Claire’s pain when the scene segues to her seeing the piper on the bridge in Boston.

Last but not least:  well done to the hair and make-up dept.  Sam’s fake beard didn’t look fake this time (unlike the one he wore to come home from the Bastille in season 2.)  His long wig also worked and the collection of wigs they are using on Caitriona to signal the passage of time are also working well.  And finally, compare the color of Ian’s hair in the “previously” scene of Jamie’s homecoming in the wagon versus the color we see when he is dragged away in this episode.  That’s a nice subtle hint that the repeated incarcerations over the past six years are taking their toll on his health (though some viewers may think he’s getting blonder, not grayer.)

 

THE BAD

If we pretend that Fergus at the end of Season 2 is 12 years old (two years younger than Romann, the actor at that time) then he is 18 years old in this episode.  Does anyone think Romann Berrux looks 18?   Me neither.  I can rationalize it because I do recall some guys I knew in high school who were late-bloomers and who changed completely during their college years –  shooting up half a foot in one memorable case.  But the lack of change in Fergus’ appearance does contrast markedly with the obvious growth in wee Jamie and Rabbie McNab (who are now played by older actors).  I’ll bet that lack of change in Fergus has made some unsullied viewers really confused about how much time has passed since Jamie’s return to Lallybroch. 

Corporal MacGregor saying “Good!” when Jenny says that her baby was born dead did NOT ring true.  I know they were trying to set him up as the villain of the episode but that was a false note in my book.

Last week I complained about the actress who plays the next door neighbor in Boston but now I feel sorry for her.  She gets handed the worst dialog. That sexual innuendo chat between her and her husband rang SO false.  I mean, who talks that way at dinner in mixed company?

I didn’t like Jamie saying that going to prison would be “little different to the prison I live in now.”  In the book that makes more sense.  We understand that Book!Jamie spends 99% of his time alone – sleeping in the cave during the day, hunting at sunset, coming to the house only after dark to drop off meat, only coming in the house for a shave and a visit one once a month or so.  But in this episode he is seen hunting during the day and visiting the house repeatedly during daylight hours.  His life just doesn’t look that bad in the episode – not in comparison to an English prison.  So I think that line rings false and also seems a bit of a harsh thing to say to Jenny after all she has done to shelter him.  I guess I can fan-wank that she’d never let him do it if she thought he was making the sacrifice purely for the sake of her and the children. 

 

THE UGLY

The deliberate maiming of a child – Mon dieu!  It wasn’t nearly so vicious in the book.  The Redcoats in the book are horrified by the incident and rush Fergus to the house for medical treatment.  I have a few theories about why they changed it (and why they introduced evil Scottish Redcoat Corporal MacGregor to do the deed) but they’ve not coalesced well in my mind so I think I’ll wait and see how others react to that change.

OMG that dirty rag that Jamie clamps down over Fergus’ bleeding stump!  So. Many. Germs.

 

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS

We still  have absolutely no confirmation that Jamie’s men made it back to Lallybroch after he sent them away in the last episode of season 2 (just before the battle of Culloden) and we don’t know what happened to Murtagh.  I’m betting THAT question will be answered in the next episode.  Fingers crossed!

When Claire comes into the bedroom in at the end of the episode (the bedroom that now has I-Love-Lucy-style twin beds) we hear the sounds of the stones from Craigh na Dun again.  Why IS that?  There’s no tension in that scene  – they just say goodnight to one another (though Frank does seem to look at Claire’s back wistfully).  Is that sound-effect meant to remind us that that even years later when Frank & Claire seem to have settled into a comfortable-if-distant relationship in the bedroom, Jamie is still a presence haunting their relationship?

 

RANDOM THOUGHTS

So . . . did anyone else notice the Redcoat holding on to Ian’s left arm as he was placed under arrest? Damn, that was a good-looking man.  With that height and square jaw he could be Sam’s body double. 

[FnkyChkn34]

5 hours ago, WatchrTina said:

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS

We still  have absolutely no confirmation that Jamie’s men made it back to Lallybroch after he sent them away in the last episode of season 2 (just before the battle of Culloden) and we don’t know what happened to Murtagh.  I’m betting THAT question will be answered in the next episode.  Fingers crossed!

When Claire comes into the bedroom in at the end of the episode (the bedroom that now has I-Love-Lucy-style twin beds) we hear the sounds of the stones from Craigh na Dun again.  Why IS that?  There’s no tension in that scene  – they just say goodnight to one another (though Frank does seem to look at Claire’s back wistfully).  Is that sound-effect meant to remind us that that even years later when Frank & Claire seem to have settled into a comfortable-if-distant relationship in the bedroom, Jamie is still a presence haunting their relationship?

 

RANDOM THOUGHTS

So . . . did anyone else notice the Redcoat holding on to Ian’s left arm as he was placed under arrest? Damn, that was a good-looking man.  With that height and square jaw he could be Sam’s body double. 

Yes, we do have confirmation - I forget if it was Murtagh or someone else, but at the beginning of last week's episode, someone told Jamie that "all the Lallybroch men made it home safe."  The mystery of Murtagh, however, may never been answered.  

I didn't notice the sound of the stones or the good looking Redcoat, but I'll have to pay attention on a re-watch.

7 hours ago, Atlanta said:

I thought Jenny mentioned that Mrs Crook passed and Mary McNab had taken her post.

She definitely did, but that doesn't explain the mystery of the missing children!  I had the exact same thoughts - where were they?  But now I assume it would have been too difficult to find that many young actors just to hang out in the background of scenes; they weren't crucial to any of the scenes that the writers decided to include.

Edited September 18, 2017 by FnkyChkn34
to, too, and two! ugh.

[toolazy]

1 hour ago, WatchrTina said:

 

BTW they did a great job casting Mary MacNab.  Her physical similarities to Claire make it all the easier for the viewer to “forgive” Jamie (stupid word but I can’t think of a better) for his accepting the gift that Mary has offered him.

[/quote]

 

So we are all adults here, right?  Why do we have to "forgive" Jamie & Mary for having sex? They, too, are adults and neither one has had a regular spouse/partner for YEARS! Are we really so ridiculous that we think Jamie did something wrong to take comfort in Mary's arms or that Mary was wrong to offer it? It's not like he and Claire were on a break.  He never expected to see her again and as it is, it will be 14 years before he does see her again.  

The same goes for Frank and Claire.  

Jesus, we're supposed to be fond of these characters - why would we want them to be that lonely and unhappy for twenty freaking years?

 

1 hour ago, WatchrTina said:

 

Last week I complained about the actress who plays the next door neighbor in Boston but now I feel sorry for her.  She gets handed the worst dialog. That sexual innuendo chat between her and her husband rang SO false.  I mean, who talks that way at dinner in mixed company? [/quote]

People who just finished off the bottle of wine.   

 

 

1 hour ago, WatchrTina said:

 

When Claire comes into the bedroom in at the end of the episode (the bedroom that now has I-Love-Lucy-style twin beds) we hear the sounds of the stones from Craigh na Dun again.  Why IS that?  There’s no tension in that scene  – they just say goodnight to one another (though Frank does seem to look at Claire’s back wistfully).  Is that sound-effect meant to remind us that that even years later when Frank & Claire seem to have settled into a comfortable-if-distant relationship in the bedroom, Jamie is still a presence haunting their relationship?

 

Ooh, that's a good question.  I'm not one of those people who usually notices the music or the sounds going on in a scene so this is a good catch.  I'm going to guess that yes, Jamie never stops haunting their relationship but they seem to get better at hiding/denying it.  I mean, they'd have to.  They couldn't go through their whole lives as awkward togther as they've been in the last two episodes. In order for something to last for years and years, some kind of equilibrium would have to be established.

And by the way, I don't buy that Claire would want separate beds.  In the books, their sex life was relatively normal. Claire is too sexual of a person to be happy in a sexless marriage, even if it's a man she is only fond of.  

[Clawdette]

I'm sad to say that I am a little disappointed.  I can't put my finger on anything specific but there you have it.

[Atlanta]

The twin beds at the end lost me. The in the book universe, that would never happen. So they just up and decided to head to the furniture store? If costs were tight, I don't see them doing that.

I'm okay with not seeing all the kids. They could be running around the estate elsewhere.

[dbell1]

Jamie as a grieving wild heided wookie was heartbreaking. And when he held wee Ian, you knew he was thinking of Claire and their baby, and wondering what his life could have been.

Glad we got Joe this early and not when Claire's a doctor. Feeling bad for Frank. The only thing he's done wrong is go to Scotland on a second honeymoon. Well, that and look like his evil ancestor.

Wish we could have gotten a clearer timeline on Claire going off to med school, was Bree under a year? A toddler? 

I'm with the group wondering why Jamie was wandering around in broad daylight. In the book we got a great sense of his isolation. This was more like he just went back to the cave on weekends. 

[morgan]

I agree about how odd it was seeing Jamie wandering around in daylight.  My non-book reader husband didn't even realize at first he wasn't living in the house.  When they showed the cave he was confused and definitely didn't pick up that he wasn't around the house on a daily basis.  

[Haleth]

11 hours ago, Petunia846 said:

Also also, that scene where Ian compares the pain of a phantom limb to the pain of Jamie missing Claire who was his heart. *sobs*

Ian is one of my favorite characters.  He is such a kind, gentle soul.  Of course he would understand that Jamie was missing part of himself and could use that as a metaphor for describing how Fergus would feel a phantom hand.

3 hours ago, WatchrTina said:

That last look between Jamie and Jenny before he is put in the wagon.  Heart = breaking.

That was very well acted.  Jenny meant every word she yelled at him.  Heartbreaking situation.

Hello, Joe!  Whadda ya know?

[CalamityBoPeep]

2 hours ago, Clawdette said:

I'm sad to say that I am a little disappointed.  I can't put my finger on anything specific but there you have it.

I'm relieved I'm not the only one a bit disappointed. I think, for me, it just felt a little thin... like we had a series of things we needed to get through in order to check the boxes, but it lost some cohesion in the telling, or something. I don't quite get it either. 

I mean, they acted the hell out of it, for sure. Each individual scene was well done. But it was missing something. Maybe the kids; maybe the sense that Jamie was living in the cave and only spoke and seemed human after having a shave and haircut each month when he would sneak home, as in the book; maybe simply the book-complexity of how Fergus lost his hand, and the not-so-villainous book-reactions of the redcoats afterwards. Maybe the episode itself just felt a little un-populated. I don't know. It was just all too simple somehow. Not so much a plot, as a series of unfortunate events.

But again... Kudos to Sam, Cait, et al, for their terrific jobs acting what they were given.

And my theory about Murtagh (not at all a result of any spoilers... no idea if any Murtagh spoilers are out there, honestly)... is that if he lived, he was part of the party that whisked Charles Stuart to Skye. I can't see why the actual character of Murtagh would have been willing to do that, as he'd have wanted to keep by Jamie's side and die with him, but it's the only theory that I can come up with for how the show will ultimately try to explain his absence. It'll be unsatisfactory if they go that route, as you'd think they'd realize that Murtagh might be just as inclined to slit Charles's throat, but whatever...

[Atlanta]

Moore is def a Frank fan. It's been awhile since I read Voyager, etc, but it seems like Claire was a nuisance to Frank's philandering. I think I remember reading her getting death stares from female students in her maternity dresses. My husband (who hasn't read the books) is a Frank fan. To him, he's the put upon husband.

Edited September 18, 2017 by Atlanta

[satrunrose]

I was dreading the Leap o' the cask incident and the show lived up to my dread, if that makes sense. I'm not sure how I feel about the evil Scottish... whatever rank he was. That being said, I always felt Fergus was too street-smart to lose a hand over a cask of booze, but losing it in a teen freak-out over how his "family" was treated made perfect sense to me. I also thought the interactions between Fergus and Jamie, and Ian and Jamie after were almost perfect. I'm pretty confident that Fergus' last name is going to be amazing. 

I will never understand why Sam isn't getting more awards love for his Jamie. I agree that the book used the setting and the others characters' reactions to show Jamie's isolation better than the show did, but Sam's shell of a Jamie hit me harder (personally, in the books I got more of the depth of his loss in Ardsmuir and Hellwater, particularly in The Scottish Prisoner). Seeing Sam/Jamie so broken is really making me excited for the printshop, though (and only part of that is for more scenes like the fireplace fantasy. Yum!).

Claire's scenes in Boston didn't hit me as hard, but I didn't really expect them to as I never really got into them in the books either. I feel for her in both, but I think after seeing her in the 60s in DIA, we already get the broad strokes (they went to the states, Claire became a surgeon, she and Frank had a complicated relationship) and the actual flashbacks never felt like they added that much to her story. One thing that is interesting is the way that Gabaldon's feelings towards Frank vs. Ron Moore's come out. I feel badly for Frank in book 1, not enough to stop me from loving Jamie and Claire, but still, as someone upthread said, all the guy did wrong was take a second honeymoon to Scotland. In book 3, though DG has enough of Frank being a jerk that I lose most of my sympathy for him. The show, however, is bringing me back to sympathy and honestly, it's getting to the point where I'm feeling annoyingly manipulated by both the unappreciated Frank version and the racist, adulterous jerk version. 

Edited September 18, 2017 by satrunrose

[toolazy]

1 hour ago, Atlanta said:

Moore is def a Frank fan. It's been awhile since I read Voyager, etc, but it seems like Claire was a nuisance to Frank's philandering. I think I remember reading her getting death stares from female students in her maternity dresses. My husband (who hasn't read the books) is a Frank fan. To him, he's the put upon husband.

He is the put upon husband.  He only put up with it because he was madly in love with Brianna. 

[Squirrely]

This episode really brought out all the feels. Other than constantly wondering where in the hell the middle Murray children were, I quite enjoyed it. Seriously, it wouldn't have been that difficult to at least show them in the yard once, or have them clamoring to hug Uncle Jamie once. Something!  

The actress playing Jenny is a gem. Damn, she had me ugly crying. 

I can only chalk up Jenny's desire to marry off Jamie as wanting to make him closer to whole again. Her brother was a shell at that point. We don't always use rational or logical thought when it comes to those we love dearly.

I've always defended Frank in book discussions. He has every right to turn into a philandering husband. I don't blame Claire at all; she didn't want to travel in time and fall in love, but it happened. But Frank is in an impossible situation. It sucks out loud for him. And yet he still taught Bree how to shoot and ride, etc, to prepare her for the past, knowing he was helping her for when she would meet Jamie. I can't fathom how difficult that must have been. I never felt that Diana Gabaldon disliked Frank. She just has an amazing knack for writing people as they are: flawed. Some of the villains (Black Jack, Bonnet) are OTT, clearly, but she really nails down human emotions and reactions. 

[ruby24]

7 hours ago, toolazy said:

 

And by the way, I don't buy that Claire would want separate beds.  In the books, their sex life was relatively normal. Claire is too sexual of a person to be happy in a sexless marriage, even if it's a man she is only fond of.  

Yeah, I didn't buy this either. In the book, they had twin beds at first, until they finally have sex again in the infamous nipple-sucking scene. I'm actually kinda surprised they didn't go for that on the show- I guess they really wanted to show them both unhappy with their partners and unable to look at them, etc., but having Claire succumb to her physical impulses is important to her character, imo. She's still human. And yes, she's a sexual being, no matter what.

And after that she and Frank have a normal sex life and one bed for the next twenty years, despite his philandering, her job and the distance between them. I think that's more realistic, actually. People in unhappy marriages often still sleep together for years. 

Poor Fergus. I love the kid who plays him though. It's going to be really unfortunate when they have to recast him (I assume- there's no way they can keep him as a 30 year old Fergus, right?). I just hope they can get somebody really good to replace him.

Edited September 18, 2017 by ruby24

[Nidratime]

I think the show chose to show them in twin beds now to signify the breakdown of their relationship in a shorthand way because they don't have a whole season to do that. That's what I keep thinking about as we go through all these early episodes. That 20 years of a relationship in Claire's and Frank's case and, a "fugitive" life, in Jamie's case has to be shown in a handful of episodes. So, these symbolic scenes are shown. I don't think that means that over 20 years they never had sex again. Couples who've had twin beds did have sex, even in real life.

[Haleth]

I'd forgotten how much time has passed since we first met Fergus at 10.  Jenny said it had been 6 years since Culloden, so I could buy the actor playing 16, but I neglected to consider all their time in France and then wandering around Scotland for a year or so.  Oh well, in a story about time travel we'll just have to ignore how young Roman is.

I too was surprised to not see any of the Murray girls.  Maybe they were off doing chores.  Yeah, that's right.  Chores.

I can't blame Frank or Claire for their dismal marriage.  They both tried to make it work but there was no way Jamie was not going to be a huge presence between them.  The sad thing was that Claire's depression and Frank's resentment got worse and worse and smothered any affection they had for each other.  No blame, it's just the way things happen sometimes.  There was no good solution.  Divorce would have resulted in an ugly custody fight for Bree.  Instead they decided to stiff upper lip it until she grew up, which turned out to be an alternative that also was not great.  I don't think the writing is a matter of Diana or Moore loving or hating Frank, his actions are very human.  I sympathize with all of them.

Edited September 18, 2017 by Haleth

[AheadofStraight]

10 hours ago, morgan said:

I agree about how odd it was seeing Jamie wandering around in daylight.  My non-book reader husband didn't even realize at first he wasn't living in the house.  When they showed the cave he was confused and definitely didn't pick up that he wasn't around the house on a daily basis.  

Ron confirmed in a twitter Q&A that everything was shot in daylight due to crew considerations. Too difficult on them dealing with repeated night scenes. 

 

4 hours ago, ruby24 said:

Poor Fergus. I love the kid who plays him though. It's going to be really unfortunate when they have to recast him (I assume- there's no way they can keep him as a 30 year old Fergus, right?). I just hope they can get somebody really good to replace him.

They announced the casting of adult Fergus last year. There is a pic of him here: https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2016/10/outlander-season-3-fergus

Not much to add that hasn't been said. I was happy with the changes from the book and yet also loved when mostly word-for-word dialogue was still there (Fergus saying he is a "man of leisure").  They blew past the whole leg injury and recovery.  One less major scar for them to worry about? (Kinda glad we didn't have to watch Jenny slice his leg open....)

Those scenes with Sam and the fireplace. Swoon.

[Juliegirlj]

Even the worst episode of Outlander is still a good hour of tv, but I thought it was a bit lacking. Can't really put my finger on why, except possibly that the pacing seems off. The Scottish Redcoat seemed cartoonish and silly. Too many kid scenes for me, and no explanation of where the daughter is. In my head I know Jamie is heartbroken but, Sam is portraying it more like broken and angry. It's still early in the season-obviously I will watch the episode again and perhaps I will like it more the second time round. 

[nodorothyparker]

My nonbook reader husband didn't quite get that Jamie was supposed to be living isolated in the cave and only coming out to roam around and hunt at night either from what was shown because his immediate response to all the redcoats popping in and out was that he should be living somewhere else.  I get that it was largely a production issue thing, but this did make it seem like he was strolling in and out of the house all the time day and night with the cave more as a literal man cave/bachelor pad kind of thing.  So Jamie's line about trading one kind of prison for another loses a little bit of something.

It must be a husband thing, sympathizing with Frank as the poor put upon husband because mine does it too.  He amusingly finds Claire being able to time travel while Frank and Jamie can't so she has a husband in either time period who can't ever face each other "convenient."  He also doesn't think Gabaldon has really thought through how time travel works in her universe in any consistent manner, but that's another argument entirely.

The twin bed change works I think as representative shorthand of the distance between Frank and Claire, not necessarily that they'll never have sex again.  When you're no longer in the same bed you have to make more of an effort to purposely go to that other person rather than just roll over to see if they're awake.  A certain amount of intimacy and spontaneity is lost.  That probably works well for Claire by taking some of the pressure off of her to try for things she doesn't feel and for Frank in knowing that if she comes to him it's because she's coming to him and not because he just happens to be a warm body lying right there.  It also helps that going to twin beds was fairly fashionable for the time period.  

[morgan]

4 minutes ago, nodorothyparker said:

My nonbook reader husband didn't quite get that Jamie was supposed to be living isolated in the cave and only coming out to roam around and hunt at night either from what was shown either because his immediate response to all the redcoats popping in and out was that he should be living somewhere else.  I get that it was largely a production issue thing, but this did make it seem like he was strolling in and out of the house all the time day and night with the cave more as a literal man cave/bachelor pad kind of thing.  So Jamie's line about trading one kind of prison for another loses a little bit of something.

 

Exactly.  I understand production issues/harder to film at night, but he seemed to be creeping around right on the red coats' heels.  And coming and going often.  Mary did have that one line about not expecting him that day, which I picked up on instantly but my husband didn't.  

[DittyDotDot]

10 minutes ago, nodorothyparker said:

My nonbook reader husband didn't quite get that Jamie was supposed to be living isolated in the cave and only coming out to roam around and hunt at night either from what was shown either because his immediate response to all the redcoats popping in and out was that he should be living somewhere else.  I get that it was largely a production issue thing, but this did make it seem like he was strolling in and out of the house all the time day and night with the cave more as a literal man cave/bachelor pad kind of thing.  So Jamie's line about trading one kind of prison for another loses a little bit of something.

I'm surprised they didn't try to shoot day-for-night. I mean, it never looks great, but it might've gotten the point across better than having Jamie roaming around in the daylight.

13 minutes ago, nodorothyparker said:

It must be a husband thing, sympathizing with Frank as the poor put upon husband because mine does it too.

I'm neither a husband nor wife--and I read the books--and I sympathize with Frank. Not as the poor put upon husband, but, just like Claire, as someone in a crappy situation and trying to make the best out of it.

[nodorothyparker]

Oh, I have a fair amount of sympathy for Frank too for all the same reasons.  I've just noticed among husbands who are either watching or tolerating the show with their wives, they all seem to be very pro Frank with at least a bit of side eye for Claire.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Well I enjoyed it. Immensely. Jamie broke ?when he fell into Jenny's arms and sobbed and wept. I appreciated and loved how Sam portrayed how broken and a shell of a man he was. Because Frank must be fleshed out, we didn't get to see on screen, that while Jenny was trying to keep him alive in the buik, he was screaming that he wanted to die, and Jenny wouldn't let him.

And I'm not going to nit over seeing Jamie hunt and the lighting outside because it was dark as Fuck in the cave and  if they had filmed Sam in there, I wouldn't have been able to see shit.

And the Scottish soldier who chopped off Fergus's hand, wasn't the corporal-that little shite was shorter with scraggly hair in a pony tail, and the other was taller wearing a white wig.

But Jamie sure did clean up weel!

[Biggie B]

Quote

When Frank takes Brianna and says “Come to Daddy and give us a kiss” she puts her pudgy little baby hand up as if to say “No! You’re not my daddy!”  Attagirl Bree!

Isn't that funny, I saw it as exactly the opposite, that she was reaching for her Daddy's face. I read the books so long ago that it's hard to remember with clarity, but didn't Bree love Frank very much?  Didn't she, as a young adult, consider him a good father? I truly can't remember. At any rate, that baby (or babies, I assume they have multiple babies playing Bree) is adorable.

I agree, too, with those who've given kudos to the actress playing Jenny. She's really so good. I always liked Jenny in the books, sometimes even more than Claire, and this actress is pretty much how I imagined her in my head. 

[Nidratime]

Yes, Frank and Bree had a very good relationship in the books. Better than Claire and Bree's relationship. And he was a good father to her, apparently not bringing up his and Claire's marital problems in Bree's presence -- at least that I can recall having only read the first four books. We saw evidence of that good relationship in the season 2 finale, during their visit to the U.K., when Bree takes Frank's side against Claire during the time Claire is trying to tell Bree the truth about her parentage.

[Eureka]

2 hours ago, Haleth said:

I'd forgotten how much time has passed since we first met Fergus at 10.  Jenny said it had been 6 years since Culloden, so I could buy the actor playing 16... Oh well, in a story about time travel we'll just have to ignore how young Roman is.

He's 15 in real life so that's not too far off from 16-17. But it varies from kid to kid. MY DS14's voice has changed and he just grew taller than me this year but no facial hair yet. My DS16 on the other hand, has a full (red!) beard and has been shaving since he was 13. People are always surprised that he's as young as he is.

[Wouldofshouldof]

21 hours ago, nodorothyparker said:

Claire couldn't have been much more obvious in her line "I miss my husband" that she didn't mean Frank or in her initiating sex that it was more about getting her rocks off than it was anything to do with him.

I kept thinking "Please don't call him Jamie, please don't call him Jamie"!

[FnkyChkn34]

2 hours ago, Juliegirlj said:

Even the worst episode of Outlander is still a good hour of tv, but I thought it was a bit lacking. Can't really put my finger on why, except possibly that the pacing seems off. The Scottish Redcoat seemed cartoonish and silly. Too many kid scenes for me, and no explanation of where the daughter is. In my head I know Jamie is heartbroken but, Sam is portraying it more like broken and angry. It's still early in the season-obviously I will watch the episode again and perhaps I will like it more the second time round. 

IMO, the worst episode of Outlander is still "The Fox's Lair" - the awful grandfather, the return of Laoghaire, Claire acting like a witch, etc.

But I agree with the sentiment; even if this wasn't your favorite, it was still pretty darn good.  

[GHScorpiosRule]

I wilna lie--I fast forwarded both the sex scenes with Claire and Frank. Just because. And since we were never privy to their sex life in the buiks, just Claire's POV telling the readers that they did have sex during the 20 years, then I dinna see why we couldn't have seen Jamie and Mary actually having sex instead of leading up to it. Fair's fair. Plus I'd rather see Sam's nekkid body than Tobias's.

[FnkyChkn34]

1 hour ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

I wilna lie--I fast forwarded both the sex scenes with Claire and Frank. Just because. And since we were never privy to their sex life in the buiks, just Claire's POV telling the readers that they did have sex during the 20 years, then I dinna see why we couldn't have seen Jamie and Mary actually having sex instead of leading up to it. Fair's fair. Plus I'd rather see Sam's nekkid body than Tobias's.

Those flashback/dream scenes of Sam/Jamie though?  Whew, those were good...