S03.E03: All Debts Paid

[Athena]

Quote

In prison, Jamie discovers that an old foe has become the warden – and now has the power to make his life a living hell. Over the years, Claire and Frank both put their best foot forward to share a harmonious marriage, but an uninvited guest shatters this illusion, bringing their differences to light.

 

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

[unlfan03]

thoughts as I watch,

Well the writers finally got Frank right, too bad with all the build up of the man it came out of left field.

Little Brianna is cute

SQUEEE Murtaugh!! He better not be another freaking fetch.

Frank really is the worst

Poor Jamie he really wanted to die

A friendship almost develops between John and Jamie but John screws it up

Frank is the worst

I guess Murtaugh is going to get his own story line...I think I'm okay with that. Though I think I would have liked to see him as a smuggler.

So John is an honorable English Soldier.

Good set of acting from all our principles all around, each week just gets better and better. But next week is going to be rough.

[Quickbeam]

Tobias did a lovely job with this episode. I thought it was well done overall, moved the plot forward nicely. 

[FnkyChkn34]

"We agreed..."?

"We AGREED..."????????

No. Just no. 

I'm only 3 minutes in to the episode. But no. 

[Hybiscus]

I freakin' LOVE Lord John Grey!!!!

that is all.

[theschnauzers]

That episode was everything I’d hoped for. Matt Robert’s script hit all the notes, and our introduction to David Berry as Lord John was tone-perfect, as

Spoiler

we’ll be seeing him a lot more this season, and seasons to come.

The stage has been set for Claire, Brianna and Roger as we saw at the end of season two, and I am most interested to see how they adapted Jaime’s years at and after Helwater.

[Glaze Crazy]

Well, I guess they could have made a worse character deviation from the books and kept Frank alive and also made him a time traveler so he could follow his wife and child into the past, constantly popping up on The Ridge, at River Run, random battlefields, etc... over the rest of the series. You know, for the drama. ;-)  That Murtagh is alive kind of pales in comparison. I'm intrigued to see where they plan to take this significant change to the books.

I appreciate that they made both Claire and Frank not exactly perfect or 100% right in their choices over their time together. Claire was rather passive-aggressive IMO about the whole "we agreed to live separate lives" idea, first agreeing about that decision they had  already made, early on (at breakfast) and then later rather pitching a fit once Frank wants to get a divorce. She knew from early days he was sticking to the "marriage" for Brianna's sake. But it was rather heavy handed to have the mistress (by mistake in times) come by the house to "embarrass" Claire in front of her colleagues.

I liked the interactions between Jamie and Lord John. TPTB had to do some serious condensation to get across how they two men found common ground at the prison in being of similar intellects. I was also glad to see they ended at Helwater with the conversation between them.  Lord John apologizing to Jamie for his actions and explaining how he arranged for Jamie's parole into service there as the best he could do for him lets the story move forward next week without a bunch of glowering hard feelings from Jamie towards Lord John that Jamie has to get past. 

[caws 727]

5 hours ago, Glaze Crazy said:

Well, I guess they could have made a worse character deviation from the books and kept Frank alive and also made him a time traveler so he could follow his wife and child into the past, constantly popping up on The Ridge, at River Run, random battlefields, etc... over the rest of the series. You know, for the drama. ;-)  That Murtagh is alive kind of pales in comparison. I'm intrigued to see where they plan to take this significant change to the books.

Maybe Murtagh will take on the Duncan Innes role?  I always drew an comparison to them in the books anyway...thought it was just me, but maybe not.

[AheadofStraight]

8 hours ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

"We agreed..."?

"We AGREED..."????????

No. Just no. 

I'm only 3 minutes in to the episode. But no. 

I was ready to turn off the episode at that point, my eyes were rolling so hard.

I think the speculation about Murtagh as the new Duncan seems more and more likely...

At least we didn't have to see Jamie flogged again?

[areca]

1 hour ago, caws 727 said:

Maybe Murtagh will take on the Duncan Innes role?  I always drew an comparison to them in the books anyway...thought it was just me, but maybe not.

Duncan eventually betrays Jamie RE: the gold does he not?  Murtagh will never, ever do so.

I was sad when Frank died in the books - he'd been ready to finally start a life on his own and then...poof.  Dead.  But Tobias really brought it and utterly broke my heart for Frank.  I never saw him as a cad in the books and never understood people's investiture in making him into one.  

Edit:  I'm looking forward to an episode that DOESN'T leave me in tears at some point.  FFS.

Edited September 24, 2017 by areca

[Cramps]

I was had to rewind a few times to fully process the changes from the book-- but I thought they were elegantly done. 

So glad they edited out the whipping over the tartan. I wonder if it was in the initial script, but got cut for time, since the tartan scrap remained. 

[Atlanta]

19 minutes ago, Cramps said:

I was had to rewind a few times to fully process the changes from the book-- but I thought they were elegantly done. 

So glad they edited out the whipping over the tartan. I wonder if it was in the initial script, but got cut for time, since the tartan scrap remained. 

I was glad that was left out. Enough flogging.

Innes will have to be reworked a bit if Murtaugh takes his place. 

These first three episodes are emotionally draining.

I want Claire's grad party dress.

Edited September 24, 2017 by Atlanta

[NeenerNeener]

I'm so glad these threads aren't locked until 9 pm on Sunday nights. It kills me when I can watch the episode on-demand on Sunday morning but can't comment. Looks like the folks who speculated that Murtagh was going to survive Culloden and would replace that Duncan character were on to something.

Edited September 24, 2017 by NeenerNeener

[WatchrTina]

I just saw it.  OH MY GOD MURTAGH!!!  I hoped and wished and had my fingers crossed but OMG they did it!  #SaveMurtagh worked!

And then, he's gone.  With no goodbye.  Heart=breaking.  But as a reader I have to assume this means Murtagh will fulfill the Duncan Innes role in future books.  I'm so happy about that.

And now I'm off to watch it again.  Thank goodness we can watch these OnDemand and spend all day Sunday reacting.  I love this show.

[Atlanta]

David Berry did a great job as LJG. The beginning of a life long friendship and respect.

Next ep better have Joe and Claire talking romance novels. Hee!

[CC70]

1 hour ago, Atlanta said:

I was glad that was left out. Enough flogging.

Innes will have to be reworked a bit if Murtaugh takes his place. 

These first three episodes are emotionally draining.

I want Claire's grad party dress.

I don't think we're going to be that lucky on the flogging. In the opening sequence you can see someone handing the tartan over to what looks like LJG hand. So I think we're in for a flash back.  :(

[WatchrTina]

5 hours ago, CC70 said:

I don't think we're going to be that lucky on the flogging. In the opening sequence you can see someone handing the tartan over to what looks like LJG hand. So I think we're in for a flash back.  :(

Oooh, you are right.  But with so much plot to get through it seems unlikely that we will have time for a flashback to that. There is a scene in the trailer for this season of a wet Jamie in a ruined castle crying out "Claire!"  I assume that scene took place in the castle ruin that you see offshore in this episode and that we'll see a flashback to it in some future episode -- probably when Jamie tells Jenny & Ian about what he found on that adventure.  But right now I can't think of a reason why we would flashback to a scene of Jamie falsely claiming ownership of the scrap of tartan in order to force Lord John into having him flogged (which is the JAMMF way of saying "We are never ever ever getting together." TM Taylor Swift.)  So now I suspect the flogging was in the first script and later either cut for time or because they realized Murtagh would NEVER let Jamie take a flogging for him or they were afraid that we (the viewers) would never forgive Lord John and they want us to like him.  BTW I like him. I LOVE the book character so I have rather strong opinions about what he should be like on screen and, so far, so good.  The evolution of the Jamie/John relationship was condensed to an unfortunate degree in this episode but I understand the necessity.  I will be curious, however, to see if the unsullied (non-book-reader) viewers really "get" the complexity of that particular relationship.

Edited September 24, 2017 by WatchrTina

[Eureka]

I always pictured the "terrible fight" as being a lot more shouting and out of control than they portrayed. 

[AheadofStraight]

It was IMO but it was also because they didn't have the "open marriage" they gave them in the show. Frank was also trying to pull Bree before she was 18 and hadn't graduated yet. Also he was making sure his daughter wouldn't get involved with a black man.

They really cleaned up Frank for the show. ?

[Hybiscus]

2 hours ago, Cramps said:

So glad they edited out the whipping over the tartan. I wonder if it was in the initial script, but got cut for time, since the tartan scrap remained. 

I think I'm in the minority because I sort wanted the tartan/flogging scene.  Not that I wanted to see Jamie flogged again, but because of the toll it took on LJG.  He maintains his composure, does his duty, then returns to his office and vomits.  That, perhaps more than any other scene showed me the kind of man he was.

[IntrovertGal]

I have to admit I was a bit sceptical about David Berry's casting as Lord John Grey (and I'm still a bit miffed that they didn't give him a blond wig, would that have been so hard? Especially since the actor who played young LJG had blond hair!) but I have to say I was positively surprised by his performance in this episode. I love Lord John Grey, he is one of my favourite characters in the books so I was rather anxious that David Berry and TPTB got him right. However, what we got so far was pretty good so I'm relieved.

The Jamie and Lord John Grey interactions were great, I enjoyed them all. Although, like WatchrTina, I really wish they hadn't condensed their entire time together at Ardsmuir into one episode! I wanted more scenes between them, more dinners, more chess games, more conversations, damn it. Still, both actors played their scenes beautifully. Sam Heughan was especially good when he talked about Claire at their chess game, the longing and grief on his face just broke my heart. And then when LJG stroked Jamie's hand, you could see Jamie's PTSD and everything he had suffered at the hands of BJR play out on Sam's face, just beautifully done. Also, LJG's horror and shame at what he had done playing out on David's face, also very well done. I'm glad that things in the episode did not end on that note but on a more redemptive one with a hint of the friendship to come.

So the TPTB finally thought they should show Frank's uglier side? It was about time. But wow inviting your girlfriend/lover to your wife's graduation party? How cold and cruel is that. Was that in the books? I don't remember that. Still, I felt bad for Frank when he died in a car accident before he could finally be with the woman he loved and who loved him.

Not enough Joe Abernathy in this episode! Hopefully, we will get more next week.

[areca]

4 minutes ago, IntrovertGal said:

But wow inviting your girlfriend/lover to your wife's graduation party?

He didn't.  He got Claire's reservation times messed up and thought they were an hour earlier - the girlfriend was intended to arrive and pick him up to go somewhere long after everyone had cleared out.

[FnkyChkn34]

41 minutes ago, Eureka said:

I always pictured the "terrible fight" as being a lot more shouting and out of control than they portrayed. 

 

32 minutes ago, AheadofStraight said:

It was IMO but it was also because they didn't have the "open marriage" they gave them in the show. Frank was also trying to pull Bree before she was 18 and hadn't graduated yet. Also he was making sure his daughter wouldn't get involved with a black man.

They really cleaned up Frank for the show. ?

Exactly. And now, I might have to go back on what I previously said - because I hate this change from the books. When I read the first 4 books, I thought Frank was a selfish, racist adulterer. They did NOT have any "agreements" and they were, at least from Claire's POV, still trying to have a normal marriage. She wasn't blatantly aware nor did she give Frank permission to date! So ridiculous. 

The rest of the episode was great. 

[IntrovertGal]

1 minute ago, areca said:

He didn't.  He got Claire's reservation times messed up and thought they were an hour earlier - the girlfriend was intended to arrive and pick him up to go somewhere long after everyone had cleared out.

Ah yes, you are right of course, I got that mixed up. Still, quite a risky thing of Frank to do, cutting the timing so close. Or maybe subconciously he really didn't care all that much anymore if Claire found out or not. He did say that maybe he wanted to hurt her.

[Petunia846]

Hello Murtagh!!!

Good-bye Frank!!!!!!!

A fabulous trade. I was thrilled to see Murtagh, but I had not expected to see him here. It does make more sense than him just randomly showing up in the colonies at the end of the season. I wonder if he'll keep in touch with Jamie and Jenny and Ian while he's gone. That's what I was trying to figure out the most if he just randomly showed up later...why he wouldn't have tried to contact Jamie in the intervening years.

I forget something: Duncan was one of the other prisoners, but wasn't he not transported because of his arm? He was with Jamie in the smuggling business in Scotland and then went over with them on the boat right? So actually Murtagh might not be taking Duncan's place, because Jamie will still need a Duncan (theoretically) while he's in Edinburgh. I'm interested to see how they work out the change.

It was sweet that Murtagh was reminding Jamie about Claire and wondering about her and the baby, which was good consistency, since they did tell him about the time travel in France. He would be the one person besides Jamie who really knows what "she's gone" means.

 

2 hours ago, WatchrTina said:

Oooh, you are right.  But with so much plot to get through it seems unlikely that we will have time for a flashback to that. There is a scene in the trailer for this season of a wet Jamie in a ruined castle crying out "Claire!"  I assume that scene took place in the castle ruin that you see offshore in this episode and that we'll see a flashback to it in some future episode -- probably when Jamie tells Jenny & Ian about what he found on that adventure.  But right now I can't think of a reason why we would see to a scene of Jamie falsely claiming ownership of the scrap of tartan in order to force Lord John into having him flogged (which is the JAMMF way of saying "We are never ever ever getting together." TM Taylor Swift.)  So now I suspect the flogging was in the first script and later either cut for time or because they realized Murtagh would NEVER let Jamie take a flogging for him or they were afraid that we (the viewers) would never forgive Lord John and they want us to like him.  BTW I like him. I LOVE the book character so I have rather strong opinions about what he should be like on screen and, so far, so good.  The evolution of the Jamie/John relationship was condensed to an unfortunate degree in this episode but I understand the necessity.  I will be curious, however, to see it the unsullied (non-book-reader) viewers really "get" the complexity of that particular relationship.

They might have saved some of those scenes for flashbacks when Jamie and Claire are together again and he's telling her about his life, as others have said. Or maybe there will be a way for them to fit them in during Claire, Bree, and Roger's investigation. Like maybe they might find a record in a log book about Jamie's flogging and that's how they know he's at the prison. I don't know...I'm stretching here a bit because it is strange that we've seen that footage in promos but we haven't seen it yet.

 

1 hour ago, areca said:

He didn't.  He got Claire's reservation times messed up and thought they were an hour earlier - the girlfriend was intended to arrive and pick him up to go somewhere long after everyone had cleared out.

But as her (supposed) husband, why wasn't he going to the dinner too?? That's what I didn't get. If he cares so much about how their marriage appears to others, why would he skip out on her graduation dinner?

[lianau]

I really hate the Murtagh switcheroo . He should be dead , sorry  not sorry .

[theschnauzers]

I have a theory about Murtaugh, but it involves next season, not this one, so I'll hold it.

[morgan459]

2 hours ago, IntrovertGal said:

Ah yes, you are right of course, I got that mixed up. Still, quite a risky thing of Frank to do, cutting the timing so close. Or maybe subconciously he really didn't care all that much anymore if Claire found out or not. He did say that maybe he wanted to hurt her.

I think that at the very least he was subconsciously lashing out. Earlier in the scene Frank's telling Claire that she should be getting going, not that she's already late--so it wasn't even six o'clock yet. Frank (1) arranged to have his mistress pick up from their house (even if he didn't have the car he could have called for a cab), (2) couldn't be bothered to set a pickup time when he knew that Claire would definitely be out of the house (if you think the reservation's at six, why not wait until seven to leave?), and (3) had the gall to invite the other woman into the house while everyone was still there and didn't even bother to offer an excuse as to who she was and why she was there. 

I didn't feel that badly for Frank in their final argument either. No one kept Frank from marrying a woman who loved him. Frank hadn't just met a woman that he fell in love with, he had a years long affair and chose to stay with Claire because he wanted unfettered access to Brianna (which is a decision that many adults make). Frank could have asked Claire for a divorce and stayed in Boston and remarried, but instead he waited until Claire had no legal say over the situation, dropped a bomb on her, and sought to do the same thing to her that he feared she would do to him (remove Claire from being a regular part of Brianna's life). 

Edited September 24, 2017 by morgan459

[toolazy]

3 minutes ago, theschnauzers said:

I have a theory about Murtaugh, but it involves next season, not this one, so I'll hold it.

You can post about in one of the speculation threads.

When I first heard Murtagh's voice, I was very upset.  Somewhere I read a spoiler about him being in Ardsmuir and dying from his illness there.  So when he turned up sick, I was afraid that spoiler was correct.  I'm fine with him being transported.

Okay, question:  Why was the term of indenture 14 years? Isn't 7 not only standard but the period of time mentioned in the books?  Why would they change it? Why do they randomly change things like this - I'll never get over changing the number of cows in season 1. 

[nodorothyparker]

This was a really solid episode that zoomed through a lot of history very quickly.  David Berry doesn't look much how I envisioned Lord John at all  (too tall, too dark) but he did extremely nice work in his initial outing in establishing Lord John as a fundamentally reasonable man who takes his roles as British officer/prison commandant and the accompanying honor of those roles very seriously but hasn't lost sight of his humanity or the humanity of those in his charge.  He also more than held his own in those scenes with Sam, who looked convincingly gaunt and worn down throughout this.  I liked the entire staging of Jamie's escape and "recapture" as an improvement both over the book and any more prison scenes that were so dimly lit I could barely make them out.

By the end, I actually found myself wishing the show had taken more time on John and Jamie: The Prison Years to establish their uneasy friendship.  There were small book things I found missing that I thought would have gone a long way in showing some of this, like the bit later after the irons are struck off (which wasn't at long as three years in the book) where John catches sight of the raw places they've left before Jamie can cover them and understands just how much it must have meant to finally be rid of them, or one of the dinner scenes where John is astonished to learn that Jamie was moving in fairly high circles in France to finally get that he's not just standing glorified guard over a bunch of entirely unlettered peasants.  I think that's what the bit about pheasant in wine sauce was going for, but it doesn't make the point as well as talking about French novels and dining with Voltaire.  The chess game scene that devolves first to talking about those they lost to John's clumsy pass was magnificent in that you could easily see how they could have been such great friends but for their circumstances and that Jamie realized that too.  And before he's even really had time to file that away the boom of John's pass is dropped that ends in Jamie being openly repulsed and John being horrified that he forgot himself.  Well done. 

I'm still reserving judgment on the decision to keep Murtagh until I see how it plays it out.  Because of sickness and their circumstances he's in a significantly reduced role anyway before he disappears entirely with the fates of the transported, but I did like him voicing the internal questions book Jamie agonized over like where did Claire go and how do they even know that the stones worked like they believed they should?  What about the child she carried?  That's the kind of thing that does work better on TV when you have someone to bounce it off of.

I'm finding myself actually preferring the show's handling of Claire and Frank: The Final Years.  Neither of them handled this impossible situation as well as they might have with it instead becoming an endurance test of self-preservation until Bree was graduated and likely out of the house where she could no longer serve as a buffer between them.

[DittyDotDot]

14 minutes ago, toolazy said:

Okay, question:  Why was the term of indenture 14 years? Isn't 7 not only standard but the period of time mentioned in the books?  Why would they change it? Why do they randomly change things like this - I'll never get over changing the number of cows in season 1. 

I do believe it was seven years in the books, but, as I recall, the terms for indentured servitude could vary depending on the cost of passage and room and board and such. And, the contracts could be extended as a form of punishment. Since these weren't typical indentured servants, maybe their contracts were longer--historically speaking--because they were prisoners? 

But, I'm trying to remember the number cows issue from S1...I'm drawing a total blank now.

[WatchrTina]

THE GOOD

They have to do so much in so few words in this episode it’s really breath-taking what they accomplished.  Look at that first scene between Jamie & John.

1. John displays his power by having Jamie brought to his office.
2. Jamie is taciturn.  His power play is that he won’t seek favor of the new Governor.
3. John’s dinner is brought in.  I don’t think that was a deliberate provocation by John so that signals naiveté and thoughtlessness on his part.  You don’t flaunt your hot meal in front of people who are barely surviving on prison rations.
4. John makes what he thinks is a thoughtful gesture, arranging for cats in the cells to keep the rats down.
5. Jamie puts him in his place for not knowing just how bad things are in the prison.  The news that the men kill and eat the rats brings home how inappropriate it was for John to sit down to his meal in front of Jamie.
6. Jamie then basically insults John by making it clear that he knows that Ardsmuir is an undesirable assignment and anyone who is sent to run it is being punished.  At first I hated that Jamie got that antagonistic in that very first encounter but now I’ve decided he was driven to it by John’s insensitivity about the food and his clear lack of understanding about the conditions in which the men were living.

Oooh, did you notice that the room where John and Jamie have their meetings has a sleeping alcove in it?  It seems John’s office doubles as his bedroom.  You can well imagine that Jamie never thought twice about that until John made his move and then, BOOM, the presence of that bed is a gut-wrenching threat. 

At first I was annoyed by what I took to be a pointless change vs. the book.  Specifically, TV!John says that his brother forced him to leave his dying friend while Book!Hal actually does the opposite – he forces John to look at Hector’s dead body, believing that it will help John deal with his grief.  I think the reason for the change is that TV!John laments that he did not get to say goodbye to his friend and then later we see TV!Jamie not having a chance to say goodbye to Murtagh.  There is a poignant symmetry in that.

Well, we finally know why Millie and Jerry were introduced last episode.  It was so that the result of the their divorce could serve as a cautionary tale to Frank and keep him in the marriage – at least until Brianna turns 18.

I LOVE the invented scene between Jamie and Murtagh when they talk about the info from the dying man and wonder at the possibility that the “White Witch” he mentioned was Claire.  At first I hated that Murtagh knew she was pregnant when she left but I’ve fan-wanked that when Jamie & Murtagh were reunited at Ardsmuir (as scene I WISH we had gotten to see) he naturally asked what had become of her.  Since Murtagh knows Claire well, he would not have accepted that she just meekly went through the stones because Jamie told her to go.  I can imagine that they had one tortured conversation where Jamie told Murtagh about the baby and then they never spoke of it again.

The scene where Jamie grabs John, threatens him, and then offers him is neck is just brilliant.  Even a non-reader can appreciate that Jamie is just devastated at that point since he clearly went off looking for the “White Witch” and just as clearly he did not find her.  Sam plays Jamie’s sadness so beautifully in that scene.

I LOVED the invented scene on the moors outside the prison wherein Jamie tells John why he escaped.  Beautiful location, beautifully played.  I liked it better than the book version in that it was John’s sparing his life (and thus demonstrating that he’s too honorable to kill an unarmed prisoner) that motivated Jamie to tell him his reasons for escaping.  I liked that better than Book!John getting the story out of him by threatening Jamie’s family.

John being moved to tears by Jamie’s rejection is a beautiful moment, beautifully played by both actors.  Jamie’s growing realization of what John is signaling when he take his hand plays out so subtly on Sam’s face.  I love our cast.  They are all so damned good and David Berry is a terrific addition.

 

THE BAD

Jamie tells Murtagh that he learned the trick about the healing properties of thistles from “A lass who knew a fair amount about healing.”  I get that the writers didn’t want Jamie to say Claire’s name out loud in the episode until he names her to John because that is such a clear signal of the growing trust and intimacy between the two of them.  But this is Murtagh we’re talking about.  Jamie would not have needed to even say her name.  He simply could have said “She taught me” and Murtagh would have known who Jamie meant.  So I thought that bit of dialog was badly written.

When Frank said “Oh you’re jealous now? Green ain’t your color Claire.” that threw me at first but then I realized that it echos Frank’s mimicking an Amercian cowboy accent from the prior episode.  Still, didn’t that seen odd coming from Frank?

I think I spotted a costume failure.  When John summons Jamie to request his assistance as a translator, it looks like one of Sam’s leg irons is not fastened.  It’s just dangling from the other leg.  Maybe the chains were too short for Sam to move as quickly as the director wanted so they un-did one of them to allow Sam to take longer steps.  Oh the things you notice upon 3rd viewing.

I appreciate that the scene in the book where Jamie faithfully translates all that was said by the dying man – repeating it over and over while being closely questioned – would be too time-consuming for the show.  Nevertheless, that half-assed exchange between Jamie and John where Jamie translates essentially nothing made no sense.  Jamie didn’t hold up his end of the bargain at all so it makes no sense that he wasn’t put right back in irons. I suppose I could fan-wank that TV!John is following in Book!John’s footsteps (trying to win over Jamie rather than bully him in order to extract the information about the gold) but there is nothing on the screen to explain the lack of consequences when TV!Jamie fails to provide a translation.

I find it rather contrived that no one seems to understand that the prison is closing and the prisoners are being shipped off to America until the very moment when they are lined up and marched out.  And it is flat out ridiculous that Jamie finds out about all this when he is pulled out of the line and a couple of Redcoats inform him of what is going on.  It’s a great visual scene (oh those tortured looks between Jamie and Murtagh) and I kind of love the idea that some of the Redcoats like Jamie enough to whisper to him what is going on despite their commanding officer not having bothered to explain things to the leader of the prisoners.  But seriously – closing down a prison would take a long time.  There would be preparations.  So it rings a false note to me that none of the prisoners have any inkling of what is happening until that very morning. 

 

THE UGLY

That gemstone was too big and ugly to be realistic and given where we know it gets stored (temporarily) in the book . . . well, bigger is not better.

 

OTHER

Can I just say that since we were cheated out of seeing the Jamie/Murtagh reunion scene in this episode, there damn sure better be a good one in Season 4.

Edited September 30, 2017 by WatchrTina

[toolazy]

17 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

I do believe it was seven years in the books, but, as I recall, the terms for indentured servitude could vary depending on the cost of passage and room and board and such. And, the contracts could be extended as a form of punishment. Since these weren't typical indentured servants, maybe their contracts were longer--historically speaking--because they were prisoners? 

But, I'm trying to remember the number cows issue from S1...I'm drawing a total blank now.

It wasn't a big deal but in the books there were x-number of cows involved in the storming of Wentworth and in the show it was y-number of cows.  I just never understood the point of changing that detail.   Not that it even remotely matters, but I just wish I was there for the conversation where someone decides it needs to be y instead of x.

13 minutes ago, WatchrTina said:

 

THE UGLY

That gemstone was too big and ugly to be realistic and given where we know it gets stored (temporarily) in the book . . . well, bigger is not better.

 

I'm pretty sure I know the aisle at Michaels where they bought that piece of crap from.  It's so very fake looking. 

[DittyDotDot]

3 minutes ago, toolazy said:

It wasn't a big deal but in the books there were x-number of cows involved in the storming of Wentworth and in the show it was y-number of cows.  I just never understood the point of changing that detail.   Not that it even remotely matters, but I just wish I was there for the conversation where someone decides it needs to be y instead of x.

Gotcha!

Yeah, there are many times I wish I was a fly on the wall in some writers' room just for the fun of hearing some inane conversation like this. 

[toolazy]

15 minutes ago, WatchrTina said:

 

Jamie tells Murtagh that he learned the trick about the healing properties of thistles from “A lass who knew a fair amount about healing.”  I get that the writers didn’t want Jamie to say Claire’s name out loud in the episode until he names her to John because that is such a clear signal of the growing trust and intimacy between the two of them.  But this is Murtagh we’re talking about.  Jamie would not have needed to even say her name.  He simply could have said “She taught me” and Murtagh would have known who Jamie meant.  So I thought that bit of dialog was badly written.

 

 

I had the distinct impression that Murtagh knew who he was talking about and Jamie knew he knew.  The stupid part was having Murtagh ask the question in the first place - that would have been more appropriate coming from someone who didn't know Claire. 

[nodorothyparker]

11 minutes ago, WatchrTina said:

I find it rather contrived that no one seems to understand that the prison is closing and the prisoners are being shipped off to America until the very moment when they are lined up and marched out.  And it is flat out ridiculous that Jamie finds out about all this when he is pulled out of the line and a couple of Redcoats inform him of what is going on.  It’s a great visual scene (oh those tortured looks between Jamie and Murtagh) and I kind of love the idea that some of the Redcoats like Jamie enough to whisper to him what is going on despite their commanding officer not having bothered to explain things to the leader of the prisoners.  But seriously – closing down a prison would take a long time.  There would be preparations.  So it rings a false note to me that none of the prisoners have any inkling of what is happening until that very morning. 

I found the whole thing very rushed too.  The book doesn't elaborate a ton on it but the prisoners have been doing the renovating work so it doesn't come as a complete surprise as John explains it.  And John does explain it, as where as well Jamie will be going, before they ever leave the prison.  Here, we get basically a line or two after what we're told is three days on the road about how Jamie is the only prisoner who committed treason and will thus be subject to different treatment, which I can already guess now is not going to be sufficient explanation for my husband when we watch it later.  "Wait, didn't they kill all the Scots after the battle in the first episode because they were all considered guilty of treason?  But now only Jamie is?  What about the rest of them then?"  And on and on.

[WatchrTina]

4 hours ago, nodorothyparker said:

after what we're told is three days on the road

Can I just say how sad it is that TV viewers don't get to experience the excruciating tension of Jamie having to share a bedroom with John on that journey?  I loved reading about Jamie's emotional turmoil at having been separated from his men, forced to go south (even farther away from friends and family) and being essentially given over into indentured servitude with no end-date.  When you read about Jamie lying on the floor each night in the inns where they stopped -- all the while just daring John to make a move so that he can justify breaking his parole and murdering John with his bare hands -- well that is some good reading.  In the show you get no sense of how far they travelled and the idea that Jamie walked behind John's horse non-stop for 3 days is almost laughable.  That being said -- Jamie's anguish at his unexpected separation from Murtagh and his uncertainty at his fate does make for good viewing.

Edited September 25, 2017 by WatchrTina

[nodorothyparker]

That makes me wish now if they were going to go for the "doesn't know where he's going or why" angle that they had included all of that.  I'm flipping through those pages to where Jamie's focusing on the back of John's neck and imagining the satisfaction of strangling him.  Now that I'm sufficiently impressed that David Berry is up to the material, both actors could have done so much with that.

[mrsjoe]

1 hour ago, WatchrTina said:

Well, we finally know why Millie and Jerry were introduced last episode.  It was so that the result of the their divorce could serve as a cautionary tale to Frank and keep him in the marriage – at least until Brianna turns 18.

 

I guess not having been alive at that time, maybe my understanding is wrong, but it seems odd to me that a woman who had always been a house wife, living at a time when women were just starting to get small financial opportunities would have the power to completely keep her children from their father. Obviously Frank is right to be afraid since Claire makes a good income and has the power to out him as not being the actual father. I'm just finding it hard to imagine the Millie we met had as many options as Claire. 

 

I'm glad I'm not alone in disliking the drastic changes in the Claire and Frank relationship. In the books, no one outside the marriage realized how empty it really was (except maybe Joe who at the very least figures out Frank is not Brianna's bio-father). Frank genuinely feels he has done a great job of hiding it all, and I seem to recall him being surprised when he's announcing he's leaving that Claire knows this is just one girl in a stream of many. I feel like this was important because it sets Brianna up to be completely shocked when she eventually sees a happy and passionate marriage versus two people who genuinely care for each other and make it work.  The relationship portrayed on the show is two people barely tolerating each other, and just doesn't match my image of what that actually looked like. They both loved Brianna enough to fake it and would never have waved their failings around so loudly.  It's about as unlikely to me as the hairstyles they keep giving Claire. Can anyone who has read the books really believe she would take the time to straighten her hair and tease it into the current style? I can't see that being a priority to her when this  episode emphasized what a balancing act she was doing with family and work.  It's been bugging me all season and tonight when she came out of surgery perfectly coifed...well...yeah...

[dustoffmom]

Quote

 It's about as unlikely to me as the hairstyles they keep giving Claire. Can anyone who has read the books really believe she would take the time to straighten her hair and tease it into the current style? 

 

You bet I can believe it, I lived it!  As a child/high schooler of the 60's, when the style was long, center parted

it!  The times were very different.  I graduated in 1970 and I never, ever was permitted to wear pants to school!  Hose or knee socks under my skirts!

 

WHAT HAPPENED?  3/4 OF THIS REPLY WAS LOST!!!

Edited September 24, 2017 by dustoffmom
Most of it vanished!

[dustoffmom]

Let me see if I can remember what I wrote.....long, center parted and board straight.  And there I was with hair like Claires!  I laid my head on the ironing board and actually ironed it, I rolled my hair each night on frozen OJ cans and then tried to sleep on them, I used chemical straighteners till my hair began breaking off at the scalp (!).  I teased it and sprayed it till a baseball would likely have just bounced off.  I wore my hair very like hers was this episode.  And yet, if there was 1% humidity when I stepped out the door then inside of 10 minutes the corkscrews and waves appeared.  I hated, hated, hated my hair.  I was nearly 40 till I accepted it, quit fighting it and just let it curl.

[morgan]

Just viewed for the second time after my initial morning viewing.  I liked it better the second time around, and try to keep in mind how a tv show has to work.  The episode has to have its own arc and it needs to tell as best it can this part of the story.  I do wish there were more episodes and therefore more breathing room, particularly with Jamie's story.  I am glad they are including Claire and Frank, although not a fan of the "we had an agreement" change.  And seriously Sandy came in the house with all of those people there?  Not for one minute do I believe that would have happened. 

My second viewing was with my non book reader husband.  His dislike for Claire grows weekly. He has never been much of a fan of hers, and I wonder if that will ever change as the future seasons enfold.  

Edited September 24, 2017 by morgan

[Dejana]

36 minutes ago, mrsjoe said:

 

It's about as unlikely to me as the hairstyles they keep giving Claire. Can anyone who has read the books really believe she would take the time to straighten her hair and tease it into the current style? I can't see that being a priority to her when this  episode emphasized what a balancing act she was doing with family and work.  It's been bugging me all season and tonight when she came out of surgery perfectly coifed...well...yeah...

But how else would we know it was The Sixties if Claire didn't have big, teased hair? :) I suspect the bouffant is also supposed help sell Cait as an older person than she played for the bulk of last season. Most lead female TV characters tend to be made up as fashion plates, even when it's not particularly realistic. I think in the books that 60s Claire just wore her hair pulled up/back as she went about her daily life. 

[Future Cat Lady]

I think the hair may also symbolizes that Claire is not entirely herself. Her very curly and unruly hair is styled in a very rigid manner. But when she goes back, her hair will be back to her wild and free style. Or I'm mostly seeing too much into it. 

On a different subject, I love John Grey! 

[morgan]

I like the idea of Claire not being entirely herself and neither is her hair.  It's all part of this part she is playing.  Although I agree that it is absolutely of the time.  People were not as casual in their dress or their hair as they are today.  I laugh because I still know women of Claire's generation who would never think of leaving the house without their makeup done and hair sprayed within an inch of its life.  

I loved John Gray!  Excellent choice.

I have to say I don't mind the different timelines but the one time they went back to Boston and suddenly Brianna was 18/years had passed and then straight back to Jamie and only like a day had passed was odd.  

I also wish that they had Jamie repeat his prayer...that she might be safe, she and the bairne.

Edited September 25, 2017 by morgan

[toolazy]

I'm not a fan of Claire and Frank's "agreement" either.  But I had a talk with myself and explained that it's over now - I no longer have to think very much about her time with Frank because from here on, it's about her and Jamie.  Finding him, getting back to him, getting to know him again, etc.  Her previous marriage is of little further consequence, except to Bree.

[Haleth]

Well, hellooooo John Grey. That actor is a very attractive young man. Ahem.

Ok, so there is no doubt in my mind that Murtaugh is going to show up again in the colonies. Sorry Duncan, you've been replaced. 

When I saw the tartan scrap in the opening credits I remembered Jamie taking the blame. Glad they skipped that. 

I still feel sorry for both Claire and Frank. It was a bad situation that brought out their worst characteristics. Pretty tragic for both of them.  Can you imagine 18 years of living a lie?

Edited September 25, 2017 by Haleth

[Nidratime]

So, the clips we saw of Jamie yelling out for Claire were cut?! I thought they would show up in this episode.

[WatchrTina]

On 9/24/2017 at 8:38 PM, Nidratime said:

So, the clips we saw of Jamie yelling out for Claire were cut?! I thought they would show up in this episode.

In the book we don't find out everything that Jamie got up to during his three-day-absence from the prison until much later (when he tells Claire -- Ian and Jenny already know by then).  So I anticipate a flashback in our future that will include that particular scene.

And now on a completely different topic --  as much as I love, love, LOVE that they saved Murtagh, I do regret that virtually all the conversations in the cells of Ardsmuir were between Jamie and him.  That robbed TV!Jamie of the very special role Book!Jamie played at the prison.  TV!Jamie can’t help but feel a special closeness to his own kinsman and god-father. Book!Jamie felt an equal responsibility to all the prisoners.  He looked upon them as his men.  He was their advocate to the Governor of the prison and he served as the impartial judge of all jail-house grievances – a man everyone looked up to for his fairness and impartiality.  TV!Jamie asking for blankets and medical care for all the sick but then settling for obtaining those things just for Murtagh is a bit jarring.  That being said, I did notice (upon repeated viewing) that when Jamie admits to John that the man he is seeking aid for is his kinsman, I think you can see John react to that information with respect.  John admires family loyalty.

Edited September 27, 2017 by WatchrTina

[dbell1]

Sam and Cait are just fantastic this season. She's so tightly wound up and he's still wanting to die. Just bring on the print shop already.

Hello again Lord John. I'm with others above who wanted more of their talks. But, it was an impressive bit of shoehorning in several years of Jamie's life.

I love book Murtaugh. I'm leery of show Murtaugh. I don't want him as Duncan. I'll get over it, I guess.

I get that Tobias is an amazing actor, but I cheered at Frank on a slab. If they bring him back as a ghost, I will hunt down the show runners. Whitewashing that character is not making me happy. He'd had several mistresses, not one for years. Ugh.

Is it next Sunday yet?