S04.E01: America the Beautiful

[nodorothyparker]

Quote

Claire and Jamie cross paths with Stephen Bonnet, a pirate and smuggler who enlists their help. Claire illuminates Jamie on some of America's history, leading him to wonder if it's possible for them to lay down roots.

Reminder: This is the No Book Talk topic. No discussion of the books is allowed including saying "in the books..." Book readers are discouraged from posting and liking in this thread. Posts may be removed without warning.

[Cdh20]

I am going to watch this tonight ! Am I going to be the only person who has not read the book? 

[BitterApple]

1 hour ago, Cdh20 said:

I am going to watch this tonight ! Am I going to be the only person who has not read the book? 

I haven't read them either and omg, omg, omg, episode is about to start!!!!!

[Cdh20]

A couple more hours to go  here....

[BitterApple]

The moment Bonnet warned Claire and Jaime of outlaws, I knew something bad was going to happen. I'm a little surprised Jaime and the other Scottish guy would be so lax about security. I remember Jaime pitching a fit when men waltzed into camp unnoticed before the battle at Culloden. 

I really hope the dog didn't die.

I'm kind of curious as to why Claire wants to live in the States when a major war is coming. Wasn't danger and violence the reason she went back through the stones the first time? 

As much as I love Ray Charles and his rendition of "America The Beautiful," I absolutely hate when the show uses modern music for the 18th century scenes. It takes you out of the moment because the soundtrack clashes with the visuals.

The green screen backdrop when Claire and Jaime were talking to each other on the river was so awful and fake-looking. 

I wonder what future significance there will be to the fact that Claire was robbed of Jaime's ring and not Frank's.

Edited November 5, 2018 by BitterApple

[Cdh20]

“Mutton dressed up as a lamb”- Claire

Was my fave line of the night!

I need to watch it again because I hosted a premiere party & watching it with 6 people made that love scene feel awkward! 

I guess Claire’s advice to Marsali on how not to get pregnant didn’t work!

Edited November 5, 2018 by Cdh20

[Netfoot]

15 hours ago, BitterApple said:

I'm a little surprised Jaime and the other Scottish guy would be so lax about security. I remember Jaime pitching a fit when men waltzed into camp unnoticed before the battle at Culloden. 

I'm horrified that a Scot would allow himself to be knocked down by Oyrish scum who telegraphed the blow so obviously!  

[BusyOctober]

On 11/4/2018 at 9:41 PM, BitterApple said:

As much as I love Ray Charles and his rendition of "America The Beautiful," I absolutely hate when the show uses modern music for the 18th century scenes. It takes you out of the moment because the soundtrack clashes with the visuals.

The green screen backdrop when Claire and Jaime were talking to each other on the river was so awful and fake-looking. 

I KNOW!!! As soon as I heard the opening song had been restyled to sound less Celtic, I thought oh, we are in America now, so the musical cues will reflect that...nice move show! But then... in the scene right before the pirates boarded, and the piano music started, I was all “WTF?  Please don’t tell me there is anachronistic upright piano on board that flat bottom boat, and the only unseen sleeping person, the freed black tiller man, is tickling the ivories & anachronistically introducing us to the birth of the Blues on the Cape Fear River!”  And then I was even more confused when Ray Charles started singing his amazing rendition of “America the Beautiful”.  Double WTF.  I get the (very heavy handed) point the director was making. We all get it. It was a very bad artistic choice to put 20th century music in this period piece.  Hope this won’t be a theme the rest of the season.

 That green screen was sooo poorly done! Even my husband who never notices that stuff commented how bad it was.

As for the pirate character, all I could think of was my old 80’s crush, Adam Ant, and his MTV video for “Stand and Deliver”.

[BitterApple]

I've been reading a lot of comments on social media complaining about the production value. If they couldn't make the CGI believable, maybe it would've been better to have Claire and Co. attacked as they were traveling through the woods. I'm assuming that would be a deviation from the books, but it would be much less cringe-worthy.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Ahh, no good deed goes unpunished, eh? In exchange for not turning him in and helping him get past the soldiers, Stephen robs them and kills at least one of their party (fingers crossed that the dog survived!). As soon as he warned them to be careful of thieves, I knew it was just a matter of time before he showed up to be that very thief. I was worried that he was going to interrupt their love scene which would make for some awkwardness

While I understand why Jamie wants to send Ian home, I felt bad for Ian when he looked around he table and saw that everyone else was staying and he was the only one who would be leaving. Poor guy must feel left out!

[brilliantbreakfast]

On 11/4/2018 at 9:41 PM, BitterApple said:

I really hope the dog didn't die.

 

I doubt it.  That would violate the "Turner and Hooch Rule" (Don't Kill The Dog).  Only "Game of Thrones" has broken this rule.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

7 minutes ago, brilliantbreakfast said:

I doubt it.  That would violate the "Turner and Hooch Rule" (Don't Kill The Dog).  Only "Game of Thrones" has broken this rule.

Repeatedly!

[AAEBoiler]

I hated the decision to overlay Ray Charles over the silent action scenes at the end. It just felt so out of place.

[terrymct]

On 11/4/2018 at 9:41 PM, BitterApple said:

As much as I love Ray Charles and his rendition of "America The Beautiful," I absolutely hate when the show uses modern music for the 18th century scenes. It takes you out of the moment because the soundtrack clashes with the visuals.

 

That was a really weird choice.  I checked make sure my music hadn't turned on by accident.  The show has stuck with more era appropriate sorts of music, updated versions of folk songs, and so forth.  I don't understand why America the Beautiful was playing over such a violent scene.  Was that telling the viewers that, yep, Claire's going to be humiliated and abused by men in North America, too?

This was a weak episode.

[Nidratime]

Quote

That was a really weird choice.  I checked make sure my music hadn't turned on by accident.  The show has stuck with more era appropriate sorts of music, updated versions of folk songs, and so forth.  I don't understand why America the Beautiful was playing over such a violent scene.  Was that telling the viewers that, yep, Claire's going to be humiliated and abused by men in North America, too?

I don't think it was specific to Claire. Nor do I think it was *telling* the viewers anything. It was making an observation/statement based off of some of the words Claire was saying to Jamie about how many people would come to America for the promise of a better life, to realize their dreams, to leave behind the stratified old world, etc. But, coming to a new, "virgin" land does not protect one from old world problems, like violence, corruption, racism, etc. because 1) "men" bring their problems, their bigotry, and their behavioral pathologies with them wherever they go and 2) "America the Beautiful" is an ideal to strive for and, in effect, we are striving for it to this very day.

[terrymct]

3 minutes ago, Nidratime said:

I don't think it was specific to Claire. Nor do I think it was *telling* the viewers anything. It was making an observation/statement based off of some of the words Claire was saying to Jamie about how many people would come to America for the promise of a better life, to realize their dreams, to leave behind the stratified old world, etc. But, coming to a new, "virgin" land does not protect one from old world problems, like violence, corruption, racism, etc. because 1) "men" bring their problems, their bigotry, and their behavioral pathologies with them wherever they go and 2) "America the Beautiful" is an ideal to strive for and, in effect, we are striving for it to this very day.

There are plenty of period appropriate songs that would have worked better.

That opening scene was weird, too.   Were those supposed to be "cave men" or Neanderthals?  Certainly not at the stone circle from this show near Inverness.  It was just so jarring and hokey.

[Cdh20]

I watched it again this morning.

Things to love:

Jamie & Claire as a solid, loving, long time married couple. How sweet that Jamie said they were married 24 years since most of that they weren't even together, but that all goes back to how Claire never left his mind during that time (which we saw so clearly in season 3). And of course his romantic words about it before that HOT sex scene! But I even liked the moments of them just talking-"I can hear what you're thinking from across the room".

Jamie comforting Ian in the graveside scene-so moving! I love Young Ian, glad he's staying. 

Jamie smiling that fake smile for Gavin before his hanging!

Bonnet was charming for a bad guy! I assume he stays around for a few seasons?

Grandpa Jamie in the near future-Yay-I love Jamie with a baby! Glad Fergus & Marsali are staying too.

The music in the last scene allowed Cait's acting to shine!

Things to ignore:

Green screen

Banjos in the theme song-give me bagpipes any day over banjos-& I don't even really like them either! ( Not liking that theme song is probably an unpopular opinion)

That Jamie & Claire never age- we like them beautiful, right?? Let them be!

[BitterApple]

It seems a bit odd to me that a woman as worldly as Claire would be so disillusioned about the history of America. She saw the horrors of slavery in Jamaica, she knows about Native Americans being displaced, the Wars, the Great Depression, segregation etc. Hell, she and Joe faced discrimination for being the only two minorities in their med school class. To me it seems out of place that she'd have this "sunshine and unicorns" take on Colonial America. If anything, I'd expect Jamie to be the one who's more naive.

I guess we needed her to have amnesia so she and Jamie could let their guards down just enough to be attacked, but it doesn't ring true. 

I didn't like the use of the song not only because it didn't fit the time period, but because when I hear it I think about the positive aspects of our country. I didn't like seeing it used as people were being beaten and killed. Mileage will vary, but that's my feeling towards it. 

Edited November 6, 2018 by BitterApple

[Lily H]

Minority opinion here - I liked the "America the Beautiful" at the end, I thought it really drove home the wide gulf between the so-called "American Dream" and stark reality, no matter what century you're in.

I never thought I'd say this, but I didn't enjoy this episode as much as I thought I would. I've only read book 1, so I'm unspoiled for all the subsequent seasons, and when we saw Bonnet, I just knew where they were going with that. I had hopes that they were going to surprise me, but no. Once again, Claire and Jamie can't have a day's peace without being attacked. It's (dare I say it?) getting a little tiresome.

[Token]

I love the original theme for this show.  Hate the new one!!

[Auntie Anxiety]

Just watched it tonight. I thought it was very slow and boring. The show has gotten formulaic. 

[ganesh]

On 11/4/2018 at 7:41 PM, BitterApple said:

I'm kind of curious as to why Claire wants to live in the States when a major war is coming. Wasn't danger and violence the reason she went back through the stones the first time? 

I get that. I mean, she knows who wins. Jamie doesn't dispute that in terms of history. Jamie did make the point that being there they can affect Brianna's future. Plus, really, the both of them, haven't met a fight they didn't like. 

I mean, I like the show, I've watched since the start, but, honestly, it's soapy, so I'm going to have to roll with it. 

Seriously the dog better be ok though. 

What I really liked was the start of the show in 2000 BC because it seemed to me like there are Stones in the Americas.

(also loved the Gellis flashbacks because I totally can buy that you've got PTSD)

[terrymct]

6 hours ago, ganesh said:

Jamie did make the point that being there they can affect Brianna's future.

My first thought when he said that was an old science fiction trope.  Jamie and Claire buy a bunch of land or something that will be of great value in the future.  Put it somehow in a trust with a letter that's to be opened on the date of Brianna's 21st birthday or something.  Boom.  All the land or whatever goes to Brianna.  Hokey as heck, doesn't work well in science fiction, but they've brought stuff back to the past.  Why not send it to the future?  If they do, however, I'll stop watching the show.

[Cdh20]

On ‎11‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 7:41 PM, BitterApple said:

The moment Bonnet warned Claire and Jaime of outlaws, I knew something bad was going to happen. I'm a little surprised Jaime and the other Scottish guy would be so lax about security. I remember Jaime pitching a fit when men waltzed into camp unnoticed before the battle at Culloden. 

I really hope the dog didn't die.

I'm kind of curious as to why Claire wants to live in the States when a major war is coming. Wasn't danger and violence the reason she went back through the stones the first time? 

As much as I love Ray Charles and his rendition of "America The Beautiful," I absolutely hate when the show uses modern music for the 18th century scenes. It takes you out of the moment because the soundtrack clashes with the visuals.

The green screen backdrop when Claire and Jaime were talking to each other on the river was so awful and fake-looking. 

I wonder what future significance there will be to the fact that Claire was robbed of Jaime's ring and not Frank's.

I assume Claire won't be pregnant when this war comes. I haven't read past Voyager, but she'll be too old!

[kwnyc]

I fall on the side of "America the Beautiful" being too modern/on the nose for the violent scene. Though I do like the early American aspect and chorus of voices in the theme. I didn't mind when Jamie rode away to Bob Dylan, because it was folk-based modern music. At this point in the colonies, many wonderful folk songs are being written (or adapted from their European origins.) I'd LOVE to hear those used.

As for staying in America, they put Jamie's loyalties front and center when the governor offered him land in exchange for swearing loyalty to the (hated) Crown. I'm sure Jamie would love a chance to fight the British on the winning side, but if he gives his Word, he will have a moral crisis.

I'm more alarmed about them settling in a colony/state where their descendants will find themselves on the wrong side of ANOTHER Civil War in less than a century. 

Go up North! Hang out with the Quakers and fellow Papists! Meet Ben Franklin! 

Oh well, I'm in...

I hope Bonnet is as good a villain as Black Jack. 

[ganesh]

8 hours ago, kwnyc said:

I'm more alarmed about them settling in a colony/state where their descendants will find themselves on the wrong side of ANOTHER Civil War in less than a century. 

Well, Claire is going to end slavery of course. 

I did have a good laugh when Claire was all Claireing it up with the boat captain over the African American guy who was steering and he was like "no, that's my buddy." 

And then of course later she's up there steering and giving him a break time. 

Edited November 9, 2018 by ganesh

[HerkyJerky]

On ‎11‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 7:24 AM, brilliantbreakfast said:

I doubt it.  That would violate the "Turner and Hooch Rule" (Don't Kill The Dog).  Only "Game of Thrones" has broken this rule

Speaking of GOT,  in Westeros no matter how nasty a person you were, you would help out somebody who helped you!

But not in America...

[lucindabelle]

On 11/6/2018 at 2:49 PM, Lily H said:

Minority opinion here - I liked the "America the Beautiful" at the end, I thought it really drove home the wide gulf between the so-called "American Dream" and stark reality, no matter what century you're in.

I never thought I'd say this, but I didn't enjoy this episode as much as I thought I would. I've only read book 1, so I'm unspoiled for all the subsequent seasons, and when we saw Bonnet, I just knew where they were going with that. I had hopes that they were going to surprise me, but no. Once again, Claire and Jamie can't have a day's peace without being attacked. It's (dare I say it?) getting a little tiresome.

I didn’t like America the beautiful not because it was modern but because using the song ironically is a total cliche.

i too thought the Oirish guy coming back was totally telegraphed. And as a result very boring.

I turned this on after poldark and was pretty disappointed. The sex scenes feel pornographic and the violence just goes on and on and on.

 

i May be out.

[nachomama]

Since I watch on the computer at work, I thought someone had recorded music over the top of the show when America the Beautiful started playing, it seemed like a mistake. Telegraphed Bonnet being the bad guy and any time they ever start talking about things going well...finally enough money to get passage back to Scotland or to settle in America, you know they'll be taken down a peg cuz they always gotta be struggling. Meh.

[nara]

On ‎11‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 11:59 AM, terrymct said:

That opening scene was weird, too.   Were those supposed to be "cave men" or Neanderthals?  Certainly not at the stone circle from this show near Inverness.  It was just so jarring and hokey.

 

I actually like the idea that there are these mystical places around the world and that knowledge of them is pre-historic

 

On ‎11‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 2:49 PM, Lily H said:

Minority opinion here - I liked the "America the Beautiful" at the end, I thought it really drove home the wide gulf between the so-called "American Dream" and stark reality, no matter what century you're in.

I liked it too.  The irony of the idealized America next to the brutal reality of the early days (and even modern days) of this country made sense to me.  They've used modern music before, and as long as they do it sparingly, I'm okay with it. 

[rainsmom]

Just watched this for the first time, after bingeing season 3 (working my way to season 5). 

Got to the end, and when Ray Charles started singing, I didn't like it at first. It was an modern anachronism. And then I watched the ugly, ugly violence of the scene and realized that, no, really, it was just an awesome depiction of what America really is.

[Camera One]

I watch this show for the beautiful imagery and setting, so I was really disappointed that the river scene and some of the landscape scenes looked so ridiculously fake.  

I didn't want to see another hanging, and they could have done without the second lingering shot of the body.  It's sad that they killed off Jaime's mates from prison (the other guy at the end).  I can see why they felt the need to kill off characters to show the stakes of Culloden, but this was just meaningless.

How did Jaime and Claire position themselves to be invited to that posh dinner?

The entire scene when they were camping in the woods wearing practically nothing, I kept thinking about mosquitoes.

I was thinking this episode felt really slow and quiet, but of course they had to end with the violence.  

I hate it when characters help someone, and they backstab them later.  That Bonnet guy is despicable and I don't want to see him again.

So is the season-long mission to get the wedding ring back?  

On 11/4/2018 at 6:41 PM, BitterApple said:

I'm kind of curious as to why Claire wants to live in the States when a major war is coming. Wasn't danger and violence the reason she went back through the stones the first time? 

I agree Claire and Jaime wanting to stay in the States felt extremely contrived.  If they need to stick around this season, at least make it a believable reason.  Maybe Jaime's aunt needs help or something.

I just watched Season 2 and Season 3 in succession, and after this episode, I don't feel that motivated to watch this season.

Edited April 2, 2021 by Camera One

[Anothermi]

Time Jump! At least it wasn't too far into the future. Just enough time for our gang to travel from Georgia to South Carolina and buy some new clothes—not necessarily in that order. Oh, and get into trouble. 

Liked:

• The fiddle/banjo rendition of the title song. Reminded me that we were in the Colonies now. 
• The clear and present introduction of the stone circle right at the start. Given that I started watching way after the series began—and can't un-see pictures posted on IMDB when I'm looking up “who is that actor?”—I exclaimed (something—don't remember what, perhaps just OH!) when I saw the stone circle being built. I was thinking Brianna/Roger because I couldn't miss her face in Seasons upcoming. The question is: Does Claire come get them? Or do they find they're own way? Still don't know where the stone circle is or when more time travel will happen. But I won't bother wondering about the details. It was shown to us up front and is now playing the role of Chekov's gun for this Season. 
• Hayes being the method of introducing the... hmm... social standards of the new world—strict moral rules, underpinned by corruption—and the class-structure-where-Jamie-can-inhabit-both-upper-and-lower. Seems he prefers to hang out with the “lower” class— i.e. all the Scots in the tavern who sang for the soul of poor ignorant Hayes (aka New!Angus). I had barely had time to get to know Hayes by his actual name—nor the other one—before they were gone. 
• Young Ian's trauma: Really impressed that they went there. Mirror of Jamie's sexual torment only Geillis/Ian this time. But Ian had Jamie to help him through. The bonding. The recall. Short but so powerful. Possibly my favourite scene from the episode.  
• Other Young Ian stuff: We learn that Jamie wrote to Jenny about where they were when they were back in Georgia. THANK YOU SHOW! And we learn that Ian's parents wanted him to be a man of learning and influence. How's that going to pan out now? (Serious question.)
• Jamie describing that what is between him and Claire continues past death. That his soul belongs with her. "Nothing is lost, just changed." Claire says that is the 1st law of thermo-dynamics but Jamie calls it faith. I call it—the beginning of the answer to the appearance of “the Highlander” in Inverness, 1945 (or 1946?).

Other things of note for me:

• We got right into Which side are you on? early in the show. The governor offers free land for allegiance to the Crown and recruitment of others who would swear the same! Jamie? Will he or won't he? No time for that this episode. There is PERIL to endure!
• We see Claire and Jamie—in partial dress—make love in the woods, in the night. I was sure they would be interrupted by bandits but was grateful to be spared that replay. But they wake up fully clothed? What's with that? Guess they are more practical in their old age and added clothing before sleeping to keep the cold away! And is it normal to leave a horse in all it's gear over night?? 
• Secondary characters are dying left and right!  Makes it hard to get invested in any of them.

New Character Steven Bonnet:

NOT a friend of Gavin Hayes. Don't trust him. He was a selfish bastard (Jimmy) in Downton Abbey and I don't trust him now. 

His Suspicious behaviour:

• Says he is a friend of Hayes but—when Jamie visited Hayes— only spoke as if he were one when the rum was produced.
• Asked to help bury Hayes. Does he plan to hide something with Hayes body? (Ah, wrote this as it happened. Now know it was to use J & C to escape. The Bastard!)
• Discusses the fascination with circles with Claire re: her wedding rings. Is he a time traveller?
• Claire and Stephen bond over the concept of drowning. Does this foretell how he meets his (well deserved ) death?

At least we didn't have to wait to learn that Bonnet is exactly what I thought he'd be. Plus he's ruthless! I'd prefer that this 'baddy' becomes a more complex character—but I think that concept died with BJR.

Toto? I don't think we are in Scotland anymore. 

Sub-plots/ plot-threads to watch for:

• Who will become the new Angus/Rupert sidekicks? And how soon will this occur? And how long will they be allowed to exist?
• When will we be reunited with Murtagh? !!!!!
• Will Claire get her Jamie wedding ring back? Is the loss of it an omen?
• How will Claire, Jamie and Ian deal with being penniless again? Make a pact with the British-Governor-Devil?
• When will the stone circle be re-introduced?

 

 

 

 

Edited July 16, 2021 by Anothermi

[QuinnM]

1 hour ago, Anothermi said:

We see Claire and Jamie—in partial dress—make love in the woods, in the night. I was sure they would be interrupted by bandits but was grateful to be spared that replay. But they wake up fully clothed? What's with that? Guess they are more practical in their old age and added clothing before sleeping to keep the cold away! And is it normal to leave a horse in all it's gear over night?? 

This brings up a burning question that I have.  Jamie and Claire are often seen with a cotton ball dabbing at each other?  It looks like they’re stenciling?  One of my friends said that they are like washing but wouldn’t a cloth and scrubbing work better?

[gingerella]

Well THAT was mighty disappointing for me to sit through.  I barely have the energy and impetus to write much because I was left feeling like this show has jumped the shark after S03E08 (whatever the First Wife was), and now it's literally a parody of itself. It saddens me to be honest, I feel like I've lost a good friend. I hear S05 is better because the two leads are now co-producers, let's hope that's the case because this? Is dreck right now. The only thing that's changes is they're in America, B.F.D. Same constant peril, same good characters being killed, same Claire mouthing off at the wrong time and getting others into trouble (and in this case killed), Claire getting traumatized, Jamie getting beaten to a pulp, Jamie and Claire having sex that I cannot enjoy watching because I'm too keyed up and anxious for someone to come bursting into the scene and rape and/or torture them. Jesus H. Roosevelt Christ, what is wrong with Diana Gabaldon that she cannot write a story without constant misery, pain and death?!

Annnyway, here's my take...

Things I liked:

* I like the actor who plays Young Ian, he's a great actor. I did feel like they gave his PTSD short shrift though, that kid needs to talk about the unspeakable things and get it out of himself.  But I liked Jamie being able to relate to him because of his experience with BJR and with Geneva too. And I appreciated the humor when Jamie said to Ian, "Your cock doesn't have a conscience but you do lad."

* I liked the sex scene in the woods BUT I couldna enjoy it, ye ken, because I kept waiting for hooligans and highwaymen to jump out of the woods and beat Jamie whilst raping Claire. That's how this show has me conditioned, and I'm not sure that's a positive thing. That said, I did love some of the exchanges between these two during this otherwise shite-filled episode. In particular:

Jamie: When my body dies, my soul will still be yours...Nothing is lost, Sassanach, only changed.

Claire: That's the first law of thermodynamics.

Jamie: No, that's Faith.

That's a very intellectual way of viewing eternal love and it goes with the character we met in S01, whom we saw was a young man ahead of his time and very open to modern thinking, so I liked this exchange because it harkens back to a better time in this story.

And this exchange:

Jamie: Twenty-four years ago I married ye, I hope I havena given you cause to regret it.

Claire: Not for a single day.

I love how they include the 20 years they were apart in the sum total of their marriage, especially since we saw how they struggled separately last season, but I feel like this exchange should have come last season, to be honest. I also love the musical score that is this couple's theme music - every time they are together in a scene that is meaningful, that music swells in the background and it just floods you with good feelings for this couple...I imagine because it also harkens back to The Wedding and all that that episode contained.

* Loving Fergus and Marsali BUT so much for Claire's medical advice about how to avoid becoming pregnant. I do think Marsali has the best partner right now as Fergus seems to have the mind to STOP, THINK, and not jump into situations where he might be in unnecessary danger, ergo he decides that a newly pregnant Marsali should remain with him in Wilmington. Good for him!

* I liked when Claire was describing the future of America and how people from all over the world will come - all hoping to live the American Dream, and Jamie says, "A dream for some can be a nightmare for others." Truer words Jamie, truer words! That exchange made me really sad because it made me think of that time period and today and how we're not much farther along in that dream and Jamie's words are so poignant even today, because there are so many people who want to come here to live this 'dream', but they and others end up living a nightmare due to racism, poverty, bigotry, etc.

Things I hated:

* Stephen Bonnet, the newBJR of S04. I hate him with the fire of a thousand suns so of course he'll be around for a couple/few seasons, right? Fuck him.

* The loss of the last connections to Ardsmuir, with the deaths of Hayes and Lesley. I really grew to like these two so much in a short period of time, and it sucks that we got them ripped from us so soon. And for what? To show MORE hangings and unfair punishment, and MORE violent attacks? Jesus, enough already. What saddens me is they are some of the last vestiges of Scotland and the people who understand clan loyalty, etc.  Maybe they had to die so that Jamie could be free once and for all from the chains of Ardsmuir and being a wanted man, I don't know, but I wish they'd done that another way.

* Claire swallowing her rings to spite Bonnet and thus causing Lesley to rush to her defense and thus, she causes his death. Can she for once just do something that doesn't put others in harms way?!?

* I HATED, I mean the hatingest hate that ever hated in Hateville HATED them using that Ray Charles soundtrack over that scene. It did NOTHING for the scene, we don't need to be hit over the head with the lyrics, find another way to do this show runners. Christ! I thought this show running team was top notch and that was such a sloppy, lazy mess.

That's all I got. I really disliked this episode. And it comes for me on the heels of just finishing S03 about a week ago so I can only imagine how disappointing it must have felt waiting a year plus for this to debut back in 2018 and having this be your premier episode. Blech.

1 hour ago, QuinnM said:

This brings up a burning question that I have.  Jamie and Claire are often seen with a cotton ball dabbing at each other?  It looks like they’re stenciling?  One of my friends said that they are like washing but wouldn’t a cloth and scrubbing work better?

I think they're just dabbing a wet rag to clean up and cool off one another.

ETA: I completely forgot about the opening sequence! While I can appreciate the cavemen/women building prehistoric Stones that scene and the people in it did NOT look like 2000 BC humans, they just looked like regular modern folks dressed in really crappy costumes. I'm not sure what to make of that either. Are we to believe that there are Stones in America too, or was it simply a way to tell us Stones have been around since prehistoric times? Either way, the costumes completely took me out of the moment.

Also, WHERE ARE BRIANNA, ROGER, FIONA, et al? I cannot believe we've gone since the mid S03 without news from them!

Edited July 16, 2021 by gingerella

[SassAndSnacks]

2 hours ago, gingerella said:

Well THAT was mighty disappointing for me to sit through.

Yes, as far as season premieres go...yawn.  Not the quality we're used to.  I don't follow this type of thing like the die-hard die-hards, but I think Ron Moore stopped being the main show runner this season, and you could tell that here.  Think back to Jamie gasping on a battlefield or Claire running from the stones in a panic, this doesn't even come close to that.

2 hours ago, gingerella said:

Diana Gabaldon that she cannot write a story without constant misery, pain and death

I'm going to defend her.  I'm not saying she doesn't deserve some criticism for the incessant violence in the story; however, the books are freaking enormous and so much content in them gets cut out in the show.  There's a lot more time in the books for the story to breathe, and there is A LOT more joy and humor mixed in with the sadness and misery.  Plot points like the Bonnet attack don't come out and slap you in the face as much in the books.  Aaaaannnnnddd, you don't have Ray Charles singing over it either.

5 hours ago, Anothermi said:

We got right into Which side are you on? early in the show.

Yes, and I love it!  Bring it!  Give me liberty, or give me death Outlander style.  I. Am. Here. For. This. Now.

2 hours ago, gingerella said:

I liked when Claire was describing the future of America and how people from all over the world will come - all hoping to live the American Dream

Me too, for all of the reasons you stated.  I do also appreciate how she is always trying to provide Jamie with context, because how could you possibly envision or believe what she is telling you about the future?  

2 hours ago, gingerella said:

I love how they include the 20 years they were apart in the sum total of their marriage.

Me too.  Even though they were with other people, the real marriage and partnership in their lives remained with each other.  

2 hours ago, gingerella said:

I like the actor who plays Young Ian, he's a great actor.

Honestly, he makes the show for me now.  He steals every scene.  Love his character in the book, and this actor so convincingly brings Young Ian to life.  I want more.  Can he have a spin off?

Other Things I liked - 

- Jamie's description of the Regulators. A group never covered in American history, and their contributions to our freedom were so important.  Plus, as someone who's formative years were in the 90's, when Claire asks, "Who are the Regulators?"  My immediate thought is "Well, Warren G of course." Reeeeeggguuuuuuulatorrrrrrs, mount up!

- "Bees with honey in their mouths, have stingers in their tails."  Words to freaking live by. 

 

- 

[Anothermi]

14 minutes ago, SassAndSnacks said:

Other Things I liked - 

- Jamie's description of the Regulators. A group never covered in American history, and their contributions to our freedom were so important.

Something for this Canadian to google! Yay. Will get back when I know more. That bit went over my head. 

But a quick rewind unearthed a voice-over by Claire that they'd been in America—she makes no provision for the fact that it was not YET America—for 4 months and were making their way UP the coast. Pretty sure they were in South Carolina.  But later we learned they were headed to the home of Jocasta Cameron—the sister of Jamie's mother—who lived in North Carolina. At least that explained why they were in South Caroline when they originally landed in Georgia. (but now I don't know why I thought that. Anyone else have a clue as to where Hayes got nabbed?) That threw me for a while. 

Hopefully Aunt Jocasta will protect them from the worst of having lost the gems they had with them. 

[Camera One]

1 hour ago, SassAndSnacks said:

I'm going to defend her.  I'm not saying she doesn't deserve some criticism for the incessant violence in the story; however, the books are freaking enormous and so much content in them gets cut out in the show.  There's a lot more time in the books for the story to breathe, and there is A LOT more joy and humor mixed in with the sadness and misery.  Plot points like the Bonnet attack don't come out and slap you in the face as much in the books.  Aaaaannnnnddd, you don't have Ray Charles singing over it either.

That's good to know.  I'm thinking of trying to read the books to re-live the story again, except from a different perspective.

[SassAndSnacks]

19 hours ago, Anothermi said:

Anyone else have a clue as to where Hayes got nabbed?

I believe they said they were in Wilmington. 
 

19 hours ago, Camera One said:

I'm thinking of trying to read the books to re-live the story again, except from a different perspective.

I definitely recommend them with the caveat that her writing style isn’t for everyone. There is a lot of minutia, and some people don’t like what seems to be inconsequential information. I find that I miss that level detail when I read other authors now, but everyone’s mileage varies. 

[Anothermi]

28 minutes ago, SassAndSnacks said:

I believe they said they were in Wilmington. 

No wonder I was lost. The only Wilmington I am familiar with is in Delaware and they certainly weren't there! 

[gingerella]

3 hours ago, Anothermi said:

No wonder I was lost. The only Wilmington I am familiar with is in Delaware and they certainly weren't there! 

Same, where is ther another Wilmington?

On 7/15/2021 at 9:28 PM, SassAndSnacks said:

On 7/15/2021 at 6:29 PM, gingerella said:

Diana Gabaldon that she cannot write a story without constant misery, pain and death

I'm going to defend her.  I'm not saying she doesn't deserve some criticism for the incessant violence in the story; however, the books are freaking enormous and so much content in them gets cut out in the show.  There's a lot more time in the books for the story to breathe, and there is A LOT more joy and humor mixed in with the sadness and misery.  Plot points like the Bonnet attack don't come out and slap you in the face as much in the books.  Aaaaannnnnddd, you don't have Ray Charles singing over it either.

I can see that, then my comment stands for the show runners that they continue to focus on the violence every season. Surely there were plenty of folks who lived full lives with being subjected to constant rape, near rape, physical violence, kidnapping, etc. It gets really tiring and I loathe that the show runners feel that the story can not be told with less focus on awful things. I’d like to see a spate of happy times, to see the minutiae of their day to day lives, etc. 

[Camera One]

1 hour ago, gingerella said:

Surely there were plenty of folks who lived full lives with being subjected to constant rape, near rape, physical violence, kidnapping, etc. It gets really tiring and I loathe that the show runners feel that the story can not be told with less focus on awful things. I’d like to see a spate of happy times, to see the minutiae of their day to day lives, etc. 

Yes, at this point, I wonder if someone has done a tally of how many times each of those things happen each season.  Though somehow, I feel like I can keep watching this show (maybe because *most* of the time, it's so pretty), though I couldn't even get through the first episode of "Game of Thrones".

To me, with a story about a time traveler, one could imagine there are so many quandaries and difficulties that doesn't necessarily involve rape, kidnapping, violent assault and being on the run/threat of execution, etc.  I know it isn't as exciting and lacks the twist of a "the person they helped turns out to be evil!", but Jaime, Claire and the party struggling to establish a new life having lost all their possession in the shipwreck would have been drama enough.  

[SassAndSnacks]

7 hours ago, gingerella said:

Same, where is ther another Wilmington?

Wilmington, North Carolina is at the base of the Cape Fear River. 
 

7 hours ago, gingerella said:

I’d like to see a spate of happy times, to see the minutiae of their day to day lives, etc. 

Me too! 
 

6 hours ago, Camera One said:

To me, with a story about a time traveler, one could imagine there are so many quandaries and difficulties that doesn't necessarily involve rape, kidnapping, violent assault and being on the run/threat of execution, etc.

I think you hit what’s missing right on the head, and that’s why the first season was so strong. Claire was trying to figure out her place in the past and how she got there, as well as the differences between past and present. We’ve lost that thread, aside from some throw-away lines here and there.

Which is why you may enjoy the books more (not to keep harping on it) because the time travel aspect is a stronger theme running through them. 
 

I’m also a little critical of the writing in this episode. It seemed a bit disjointed or clunky to me. It was a whole lot of exposition and explanation, which felt a little cheap. While I typically don’t mind Claire’s voice-overs, there seemed to be a lot in this episode, which took the place of actual scenes we should have seen. 

[Cdh20]

The violence comes in closer doses in the show than in the thousand page books for sure! If you love reading, then the books will indeed give you more peaceful moments, but also more minutiae. 
 

I think most of us will agree this was not a compelling season opener. 

[gingerella]

On 7/17/2021 at 7:12 AM, Cdh20 said:

The violence comes in closer doses in the show than in the thousand page books for sure! If you love reading, then the books will indeed give you more peaceful moments, but also more minutiae. 
 

I think most of us will agree this was not a compelling season opener. 

I wonder - and thus is a question for you old timers who watches when the seasons first aired - are the episodes we're not liking, did they play better with a week in between them? Or in the case if this episode, a year+ between the end of S03 and the beginning of S04? Just curious since we're watching without season breaks right now...

[Anothermi]

8 minutes ago, gingerella said:

Or in the case if this episode, a year+ between the end of S03 and the beginning of S04?

How do you work that out? I'd mentioned—see quote below—that Claire gave us a voice-over stating they'd been making their way up the coast for 4 months! We have to assume from Georgia because that was where they washed up after the storm. Was there an indication of how long they had been in Wilmington that would fill out the time to more than a year?

On 7/15/2021 at 10:15 PM, Anothermi said:

But a quick rewind unearthed a voice-over by Claire that they'd been in America—she makes no provision for the fact that it was not YET America—for 4 months and were making their way UP the coast.

 

[Cdh20]

7 minutes ago, gingerella said:

I wonder - and thus is a question for you old timers who watches when the seasons first aired - are the episodes we're not liking, did they play better with a week in between them? Or in the case if this episode, a year+ between the end of S03 and the beginning of S04? Just curious since we're watching without season breaks right now...

Personally I enjoyed bingeing ( the first 3 seasons) more than watching live week to week, years apart ( 4 & 5). I hope you won’t give up! IMO season 4 is the weakest, both it’s adaptation & its source material, but season 5 is much stronger.

[Cdh20]

31 minutes ago, Anothermi said:

How do you work that out? I'd mentioned—see quote below—that Claire gave us a voice-over stating they'd been making their way up the coast for 4 months! We have to assume from Georgia because that was where they washed up after the storm. Was there an indication of how long they had been in Wilmington that would fill out the time to more than a year?

 

It has only been 4 months in showtime  from 313-401. Maybe she meant viewers waiting a year to watch it ( it was actually about 14 mths)? 

[Anothermi]

31 minutes ago, Cdh20 said:

It has only been 4 months in showtime  from 313-401. Maybe she meant viewers waiting a year to watch it ( it was actually about 14 mths)? 

Thanks that makes sense. I have to stop trying to speed read. 🙄

[gingerella]

Anothermi, I was referring to the year + between S03 & S04, not within the actual Story.

Edited July 19, 2021 by gingerella