S04.E08: Wilmington

[Athena]

Quote

Roger's diligent search for Brianna pays off when he finds her in Wilmington, but their romantic reunion comes to an abrupt halt when she discovered pertinent information that he intentionally kept from her.

Reminder: This is the No Book Talk topic. No discussion of the books is allowed including saying "in the books..." Posts may be removed without warning.

[BitterApple]

Well damn, that was brutal. 

Never thought I'd say this, but I'm finding the Brianna/Roger storyline much more intriguing than the endless loop of Claire saving lives while Jamie averts catastrophe. 

I was eye-rolling the Governor not seeing the obvious with regards to who tipped off the Regulators. He's got a Scottish guy sitting across from him who fought for the Clans at Culloden, but let's pin it on Washington instead! Sounds reasonable...

Claire doing a hernia surgery in 90 seconds? Sure, why not. 

Poor Brianna though. To go from willingly losing your virginity to being raped all in one night? I can't imagine. I don't know what people were like back then but it sucks to see an entire tavern sitting idly by while a woman is viciously assaulted in the next room. That last scene of her limping off knowing there was nothing she could do was heartbreaking. 

Given that she was with both men in such close proximity, I have a feeling of what's coming down the line....

[Cdh20]

I started this epi smiling! Finally we get to see that grandbaby! And Claire saying that she wished Bri was there to meet George Washington. Jamie figuring out what to do during the play! Roger & Bri reuniting & handfasting! Claire wowing the men doing a surgery in the lobby.

Finished the epi annoyed with Roger leaving Bri- again WTH Roger. I liked him in epi 213 when he was introduced, but I think they have not spent enough time developing a relationship at all so it seemed so weird that Bri would be like yeah let's get engaged/married now 5 mins after finding each other. Was it because Roger followed her? That was a big romantic gesture, but then he left her alone after their fight, which was weird.

Murtagh & Fergus' reunion was a little lackluster, it could have been more.

I hate that no one came to Bri's rescue at the inn, but actually liked that we didn 't have to see that rape, it was indeed effective!

And Bitter Apple is right - we all know what is coming now!

And Rik needs a trip to the groomers! 

[Fen Tiger]

Roger is a patronizing  jerk. Never read the books but not sure if he can be redeemed. Slut shaming, then making decisions for her. 

[BitterApple]

17 hours ago, Fen Tiger said:

Roger is a patronizing  jerk. Never read the books but not sure if he can be redeemed. Slut shaming, then making decisions for her. 

 I think I would've kicked him in the nuts if he'd told me I was acting like a child. At this stage none of them have a concrete understanding of how history and time travel works. Even assuming that "whatever's happened has happened," of course Brianna would want to make an attempt to prevent Claire's and Jamie's deaths. Doing something is better than doing nothing, and I think Brianna was dealing with a heaping dose of guilt because her last moments with Frank ended on a sour note. 

Also, prior to going through the Stones, weren't she and Roger broken up? She certainly didn't need his permission to save her parents so I don't know where he's getting off like she left him at the altar and disappeared. 

Edited December 24, 2018 by BitterApple

[Netfoot]

On 12/23/2018 at 1:41 PM, BitterApple said:

That last scene of her limping off knowing there was nothing she could do was heartbreaking. 

Because in the entire town, there wasn't a single hatchet she could lay hands on.

[nara]

Enjoyed meeting George Washington! But now he’s another victim of Hurricane ClaireandJamie, having been accidentally framed for treason. Maybe they can find a way to frame Bonnet instead? I mean, he was already slated to be executed by the British. By helping him go free, Jamie and Claire have done damage that needs to be repaired,

I wish we knew more of Murtagh’s people so we could speculate about the mole. I was annoyed that Jamie sent Fergus into a potentially dangerous situation when he has a little baby. I’m glad Murtagh was a little miffed too, even if for a different reason. I am tired of everyone loving Jamie. In any case, I want a story line for Fergus! 

I hate hate hate that they put another rape on this show. I am beginning to wonder if something is seriously wrong with the author. However, I will say that they did a good job staging it, and we felt the horror of it without us having to see too much. The callous disregard of the pub customers did not come as a surprise to me at all. Poor Bree—I hope she doesn’t feel like she deserved it. Perhaps Jamie will help her get through the recovery process.

On happier note. I thought the love scene between Roger and Brianna was well done. I do wonder why all the men have to talk so much during sex! And what was up the carpet-drape question? Do men really speak like that?

[Cdh20]

1 hour ago, nara said:

Enjoyed meeting George Washington! But now he’s another victim of Hurricane ClaireandJamie, having been accidentally framed for treason. Maybe they can find a way to frame Bonnet instead? I mean, he was already slated to be executed by the British. By helping him go free, Jamie and Claire have done damage that needs to be repaired,

I wish we knew more of Murtagh’s people so we could speculate about the mole. I was annoyed that Jamie sent Fergus into a potentially dangerous situation when he has a little baby. I’m glad Murtagh was a little miffed too, even if for a different reason. I am tired of everyone loving Jamie. In any case, I want a story line for Fergus! 

I hate hate hate that they put another rape on this show. I am beginning to wonder if something is seriously wrong with the author. However, I will say that they did a good job staging it, and we felt the horror of it without us having to see too much. The callous disregard of the pub customers did not come as a surprise to me at all. Poor Bree—I hope she doesn’t feel like she deserved it. Perhaps Jamie will help her get through the recovery process.

On happier note. I thought the love scene between Roger and Brianna was well done. I do wonder why all the men have to talk so much during sex! And what was up the carpet-drape question? Do men really speak like that?

That line was particularly cringey, although I think we were supposed to find it funny?

Edited December 26, 2018 by Cdh20

[BitterApple]

1 hour ago, nara said:

Enjoyed meeting George Washington! But now he’s another victim of Hurricane ClaireandJamie, having been accidentally framed for treason. 

I absolutely loathed Jamie and Claire in S2 because of all the people they set up, hurt and betrayed in their futile effort to prevent the Battle of Culloden. It pissed me off even more how they rationalized it by saying it was for the greater good. I hope this doesn't become a pattern in S4. For two people who act like they have such great moral character, they certainly don't think twice about gambling with others' lives.

[ganesh]

I did have a good laugh with Claire's crack about the cherry trees. I'd probably be a little overwhelmed too. 

Of course, we had a big deal on the ship last week and that's done with. 

I can't blame Claire being annoyed at the guy but believing she wasn't a doctor. She shouldn't be surprised but it still bugs. 

Did people always talk like that at a play? 

Edited December 26, 2018 by ganesh

[ganesh]

On 12/24/2018 at 12:02 AM, Fen Tiger said:

Roger is a patronizing  jerk.

I can't figure out if the show is making him out to be the modern Jamie or what but he needs to be knocked down a peg. He yanks Brianna out the bar and then drags her away. And then she wants to get married? OK? 

I found their scene of wedded bliss to drag. 

The first two seasons did such a good job of world building and character development, but since it's been more like, we need to move to the next plot point. I know they're constrained by the source but it sounds like the books are thin. 

Edited December 26, 2018 by ganesh

[Cdh20]

1 hour ago, ganesh said:

I can't figure out if the show is making him out to be the modern Jamie or what but he needs to be knocked down a peg. He yanks Brianna out the bar and then drags her away. And then she wants to get married? OK? 

I found their scene of wedded bliss to drag. 

The first two seasons did such a good job of world building and character development, but since it's been more like, we need to move to the next plot point. I know they're constrained by the source but it sounds like the books are thin. 

They clearly have not shown character development or relationship development enough with Bri & Roger, not as much as they did with Jamie & Claire, although I try to think back to the beginning when we didn’t know much about Jamie either- but at least each time we learned something about his character it was positive. With Roger it’s been too negative this season, I hope that turns around! 

2 hours ago, BitterApple said:

I absolutely loathed Jamie and Claire in S2 because of all the people they set up, hurt and betrayed in their futile effort to prevent the Battle of Culloden. It pissed me off even more how they rationalized it by saying it was for the greater good. I hope this doesn't become a pattern in S4. For two people who act like they have such great moral character, they certainly don't think twice about gambling with others' lives.

Did they really ruin anyone’s life?  Do I have selective memory?

[ganesh]

4 hours ago, nara said:

I hate hate hate that they put another rape on this show. I am beginning to wonder if something is seriously wrong with the author.

Yes, I'd say the author isn't nearly as good as we've been led to believe. This was just tropey and derivative. I fear the author ran out of gas after Scotland. 

 

8 minutes ago, Cdh20 said:

They clearly have not shown character development or relationship development enough with Bri & Roger, not as much as they did with Jamie & Claire, although I try to think back to the beginning when we didn’t know much about Jamie either- but at least each time we learned something about his character it was positive. With Roger it’s been too negative this season, I hope that turns around! 

I don't think anyone got much character development after S2. There's a reason why we all liked seeing Mert back. 

13 minutes ago, Cdh20 said:

Did they really ruin anyone’s life?  

They did get the count killed. 

[AuntieMame]

2 hours ago, ganesh said:

I did have a good laugh with Claire's crack about the cherry trees. I'd probably be a little overwhelmed too. 

Of course, we had a big deal on the ship last week and that's done with. 

I can't blame Claire being annoyed at the guy but believing she wasn't a doctor. She shouldn't be surprised but it still bugs. 

Did people always talk like that at a play? 

I believe that talking at the theater has always been considered rude. Quote from a very different show: "You'll go to the special hell; the one reserved for child molesters and people who talk at the theater."

Even when the play is bad you aren't supposed to talk during the performance .

[theschnauzers]

From what I’ve gathered from BTS features and other things about the episode, talking was the usual custom at plays in that time period. Its only more recently that silence was to be preferred at performances,

[BitterApple]

2 hours ago, Cdh20 said:

 

Did they really ruin anyone’s life?  Do I have selective memory?

Well, they killed Dougal, ruined the Comte St. Germain's business, which led to Mary being raped, eventually got him killed, hoodwinked Alex Randall into breaking Mary's heart, outed Louise's pregnancy without her permission, subverted BPC (who trusted Jamie) and infected innocent people with fake smallpox. It seems like people have bad outcomes when they come into contact with Jamie and Claire, lol.

[Cdh20]

You know they seemed like they interfered at the time, especially Claire, but then in the end I thought how they weren’t really able to change anything anyway. Dougal would have died at Culloden ( most likely), Colum from his disease. If Mary hadn’t been raped she’d have been married to the ugly warty guy she was engaged to, so that freed her to later get together with Alex. Master Raymond killed Le Comte Ste Germain, not Claire! It’s always interesting in discussing these things how people’s perspectives are so different, & I enjoy reading them.

[BusyOctober]

These time travel episodes make me kinda twitchy.  My OCD-ish brain needs a better explanation of how it works!  I’m not going to read the books, so I will just need to make up my own rules.  Just like I made up my own reasoning for why Every. Damn. Person. they ever ran into shows up, no matter what country Jamie & Claire (& now Brianne & Roger) are in...

when they go through the stones, they pick up some ancient telepathic form of Facebook Friend request...it attracts people from their past(s) to seek them out, either consciously or unconsciously, no matter how many years have past or how tangential their previous interactions were. Not sure if it should be called “Craigh na Dun’s List” or “Druid Do U Know Me” or “Six Scottish Degrees of Separation”.

So looks like Brianne has her mom’s impulsive attitude, but she didn’t get the same ability to avoid being raped.  Claire was threatened with sexual assault numerous times, in numerous settings. Yet poor Brianne gets raped on the same night she gets married and loses her virginity.  Gotta say, I am overall the Harlequin Romance style sex scenes. I get it, they are incredibly attractive people who share a love like no one else’s.  Yawn.  Put your clothes back on and keep the plot moving.  

Once we discovered George Washington would be in the audience , I really wanted the play to be “Hamilton”.

[ganesh]

I'm hoping Jamie pinning the mole on Washington didn't screw anything up. 

[toolazy]

4 hours ago, ganesh said:

I'm hoping Jamie pinning the mole on Washington didn't screw anything up. 

I thought this was literal for a second.  I thought you meant that Jamie stuck a fake mole* onto George Washington and I'm ashamed of how long it took for me to figure out what you actually meant.  

 

*This is something people did back then, the wearing of fake moles. 

[Netfoot]

7 hours ago, ganesh said:

 

I'm hoping Jamie pinning the mole on Washington didn't screw anything up. 

 

Well, try as they might, they couldn't change events surrounding Culloden.   So, I don't think it likely they will have any effect on history as it pertains to Washington.

[ganesh]

Yeah, but here's has to be some drama around it. Claire being Claire notwithstanding, I would completely be freaking out if I were her. 

There could be some short term problems. 

Then again with this show, they're likely to drop it next week. 

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Ugh, Roger can still fuck right off. I loved that after he dragged Brianna off to have sex in a barn, she stopped him and reminded him that the last time they were about to have sex, he said that he'd have all of her or none of her. Oh, yeah, THAT. But somehow he'd managed to temporarily forget that and was willing to have sex with an unengaged hussy!

And then after he inadvertently spilled the beans about the fact that he knew about Claire's death and chose not to tell Brianna, he had the fucking GALL to tell her that since she was now his wife, she should start listening to him? GTFO, Roger.

As for accusing her of being a child, he's the one acting like a brat. It's always "my way or the highway" with him. He even reminded her just before they had sex that if they did it, she was his forever. Ugh.

I also hated the sex scene with Brianna and Roger. The dialogue was SO CHEESY.

It's already the eighth episode of the season so I guess we were long overdue for a rape/attempted rape/woman in peril. Let me guess - Brianna will find herself pregnant and not know if the baby is Roger's or Bonnet's, and when she finally tells Roger he will blame her for sending him away.

When Lizzie saw Roger dragging Brianna off, I was kind of hoping that Lizzie would end up bonking him on the head with a shovel or something. But when Bonnet dragged Brianna off, I was REALLY hoping that Lizzie would show up to save the day. But of course not, because this is Outlander and it's not Outlander if there aren't psychotic men violently attacking women. That last scene just reminded me how much I don't miss about S1.

[terrymct]

On 12/23/2018 at 12:41 PM, BitterApple said:

Well damn, that was brutal. 

Never thought I'd say this, but I'm finding the Brianna/Roger storyline much more intriguing 

Agreed but I have some issues.  First, the actress playing Brianna is terrible.  Her performance is worthy of a second rate high school drama production.  Next, is Brianna supposed to be stupid?  I thought she was supposed to be a modern 70’s young woman.  She previously gave Roger a speech, then backs off all of that because he’s following her.  Sure, not creepy, obviously marry him immediately.  Wait, he said something you didn’t want to hear that is entirely consistent with his past behavior?  OMG, get away from me!   I guess it fits with her character being more of a flouncy drama queen than anything else.  Then of course she’s raped because that’s how Outlander rolls.   

More Murtaugh please. 

On 12/24/2018 at 6:41 PM, Netfoot said:

Because in the entire town, there wasn't a single hatchet she could lay hands on.

Or a frigging knife.  Or a sturdy stick

[terrymct]

On 12/26/2018 at 11:23 AM, BitterApple said:

I absolutely loathed Jamie and Claire in S2 because of all the people they set up, hurt and betrayed in their futile effort to prevent the Battle of Culloden. It pissed me off even more how they rationalized it by saying it was for the greater good. I hope this doesn't become a pattern in S4. For two people who act like they have such great moral character, they certainly don't think twice about gambling with others' lives.

I still maintain that Claire is the ultimate villain in this show.  In season 1, she did a damn fine job of bringing Black Jack down on the community and destroyed lives pretty much everywhere she went.  

On 12/26/2018 at 1:58 PM, Cdh20 said:

They clearly have not shown character development or relationship development enough with Bri & Roger, not as much as they did with Jamie & Claire, although I try to think back to the beginning when we didn’t know much about Jamie either- but at least each time we learned something about his character it was positive. With Roger it’s been too negative this season, I hope that turns around! 

Did they really ruin anyone’s life?  Do I have selective memory?

Dougal might have hoped for a different outcome for a start.  Despite his womanizing, his goals were consistently protecting the clan and restoring a Stuart to the throne.  Of course, like every single man on earth he wanted Claire.  

[terrymct]

23 hours ago, ElectricBoogaloo said:

When Lizzie saw Roger dragging Brianna off, I was kind of hoping that Lizzie would end up bonking him on the head with a shovel or something. But when Bonnet dragged Brianna off, I was REALLY hoping that Lizzie would show up to save the day. But of course not, because this is Outlander and it's not Outlander if there aren't psychotic men violently attacking women. That last scene just reminded me how much I don't miss about S1.

Lizzie was put out that Bri went off with Roger.  I suspect that Lizzie is going to tell Bri some version of “that’s what happens when you go off with men unescorted”.

[Cdh20]

2 hours ago, terrymct said:

I still maintain that Claire is the ultimate villain in this show.  In season 1, she did a damn fine job of bringing Black Jack down on the community and destroyed lives pretty much everywhere she went.  

Dougal might have hoped for a different outcome for a start.  Despite his womanizing, his goals were consistently protecting the clan and restoring a Stuart to the throne.  Of course, like every single man on earth he wanted Claire.  

I have a few friends who do not like Claire at all, but I don't think that is the popular opinion? Aren't we supposed to root for the main character? 

 

I maintain that Jamie & Claire killing Dougal cut his life short by only hours!

[Nidratime]

4 hours ago, terrymct said:

I still maintain that Claire is the ultimate villain in this show.  In season 1, she did a damn fine job of bringing Black Jack down on the community and destroyed lives pretty much everywhere she went.  

Dougal might have hoped for a different outcome for a start.  Despite his womanizing, his goals were consistently protecting the clan and restoring a Stuart to the throne.  Of course, like every single man on earth he wanted Claire.  

Well, remember, before Claire even showed up, Blackjack had already "visited" Lallybroch, had tried to rape Jenny, arrested Jamie, and whipped him to an inch of his life. So, it's not like Blackjack was unknown to the community and vice versa.

As for Dougal, he was trying to usurp Colum's position without actually outright challenging him by going behind his back, collecting money from their tenants for Bonnie Prince Charlie, and, in effect, pulling their clan into a rebellion Colum didn't want to support. If it hadn't been for Jamie's last minute maneuvers, all the Fraser men would've died.

[nara]

31 minutes ago, Nidratime said:

Well, remember, before Claire even showed up, Blackjack had already "visited" Lallybroch, had tried to rape Jenny, arrested Jamie, and whipped him to an inch of his life. So, it's not like Blackjack was unknown to the community and vice versa.

As for Dougal, he was trying to usurp Colum's position without actually outright challenging him by going behind his back, collecting money from their tenants for Bonnie Prince Charlie, and, in effect, pulling their clan into a rebellion Colum didn't want to support. If it hadn't been for Jamie's last minute maneuvers, all the Fraser men would've died.

Also, Blackjack’s men were about to ambush Douglas and co at that rooster shaped rock, but Claire warned them.  Otherwise, they might have been killed and Jamie might have been raped anyway. 

I wonder if Dougal would have maneuvering without Geillis’s influence. I got the impression that she played a big role in his actions, but I am not sure if that was explicitly stated.

[ganesh]

I wouldn't call Claire a villain, but selfish? Yeah I think so. That's what gets everyone into trouble. 

She genuinely wanted to avoid the destruction of the Scottish way of life, but she certainly left some casualties in her wake. She is quick to act if her medical skills are in need. 

What gets me is that after 20 years, she's largely one dimensional and there hasn't been much growth. Since S2 there really hasn't been much of a narrative direction. They're all just there for the most part. There's actually more story to Mer's plot. 

[rxpert14]

5 hours ago, Cdh20 said:

Aren't we supposed to root for the main character? 

I do. I root for Claire 100%. And at the risk of being quite unpopular, she's the #1 reason why I became hooked on the show and the sole reason I read the entire book series. For me, she's the hero.

[ganesh]

It's not necessary for me to root for the main character on a given show. I just don't want to be bored. 

I don't necessarily know that I'd call Claire heroic. 

[terrymct]

2 hours ago, ganesh said:

What gets me is that after 20 years, she's largely one dimensional and there hasn't been much growth. Since S2 there really hasn't been much of a narrative direction. They're all just there for the most part. There's actually more story to Mer's plot. 

Agreed.  Claire is probably like that by design though. She's a romance novel heroine. You as the reader/viewer are supposed to be able to pour yourself into the plucky and romantic female lead.  

[Cdh20]

5 hours ago, nara said:

Also, Blackjack’s men were about to ambush Douglas and co at that rooster shaped rock, but Claire warned them.  Otherwise, they might have been killed and Jamie might have been raped anyway. 

I wonder if Dougal would have maneuvering without Geillis’s influence. I got the impression that she played a big role in his actions, but I am not sure if that was explicitly stated.

 As much trouble as it seems she causes Jamie- she saved him so many times too! 

 

That’s an interesting backstory we don’t know- did Geillis convince Dougal to join the cause? 

[Cdh20]

1 hour ago, ganesh said:

It's not necessary for me to root for the main character on a given show. I just don't want to be bored. 

I agree, but in this case if I didn’t love these characters I don’t think I’d watch it. I start a lot of shows that are recommended but rarely like them this much and that is down to really understanding & feeling these characters. 

47 minutes ago, terrymct said:

Agreed.  Claire is probably like that by design though. She's a romance novel heroine. You as the reader/viewer are supposed to be able to pour yourself into the plucky and romantic female lead.  

Weirdly I think I relate to Jamie’s resilience even more than Claire’s. But I do like that she is strong, strong woman, especially emotionally.

[Cdh20]

2 hours ago, rxpert14 said:

I do. I root for Claire 100%. And at the risk of being quite unpopular, she's the #1 reason why I became hooked on the show and the sole reason I read the entire book series. For me, she's the hero.

I don’t think that opinion is unpopular.

A perhaps more popular one is being in love with Jamie. 

[terrymct]

12 hours ago, Cdh20 said:

I don’t think that opinion is unpopular.

A perhaps more popular one is being in love with Jamie. 

I was hooked in season one by the interesting look at Clan life on the cusp of massive change, the beautiful scenery and costumes, and the interesting characters other than Jamie, Claire, and Black Jack.  The secondary characters were much richer and more real and I got invested in them. Jamie, Claire, and Black Jack were too shallow and cartoonish.  Now there’s no development of the secondary characters and the scenery is augmented with crappy cgi. Oh and rape du jour is back.  Can torture porn be returning as well?

[Cdh20]

5 hours ago, terrymct said:

I was hooked in season one by the interesting look at Clan life on the cusp of massive change, the beautiful scenery and costumes, and the interesting characters other than Jamie, Claire, and Black Jack.  The secondary characters were much richer and more real and I got invested in them. Jamie, Claire, and Black Jack were too shallow and cartoonish.  Now there’s no development of the secondary characters and the scenery is augmented with crappy cgi. Oh and rape du jour is back.  Can torture porn be returning as well?

I agree there is so much to like -the sets, scenery, costumes, attention to detail, but I need a poll to see if people like secondary characters more than mains? And how sad for you because we lost most of those characters in season 2/3. 

[terrymct]

41 minutes ago, Cdh20 said:

I agree there is so much to like -the sets, scenery, costumes, attention to detail, but I need a poll to see if people like secondary characters more than mains? And how sad for you because we lost most of those characters in season 2/3. 

Yeah, and thus why I was happy to see Murtagh.  In Brianna's brief visit to the Highlands it was mostly Laoghaire, who has always been a week character herself.   If they’d stay somewhere and build up a community of characters again...

[Cdh20]

Just now, terrymct said:

Yeah, and thus why I was happy to see Murtagh.  In Brianna's brief visit to the Highlands it was mostly Laoghaire, who has always been a week character herself.   If they’d stay somewhere and build up a community of characters again...

Don't you think that's what will happen now that they have their cabin at Fraser's ridge? They will eventually have a community I think. Until that cabin burns down?

[terrymct]

Just now, Cdh20 said:

Don't you think that's what will happen now that they have their cabin at Fraser's ridge? They will eventually have a community I think. Until that cabin burns down?

You’d hope so, but yeah the fire and there's a battle coming between Murtaugh's guys and the Colonial reps.  That sounds like running through storylines again.  

[Cdh20]

1 minute ago, terrymct said:

You’d hope so, but yeah the fire and there's a battle coming between Murtaugh's guys and the Colonial reps.  That sounds like running through storylines again.  

Since I love Jamie & Claire, I don't mind seeing a bit of domesticity, but I think there needs to be some excitement  as well, although having them in constant peril is no fun!

So did you love the first 1/2 of the first season the most? I thought it was so slow. Of course eventually I realized it held a lot of info about the future, but at the time I didn't know that. After rewatching I paid more attention to the details of conversations, etc.

[ganesh]

3 hours ago, Cdh20 said:

Don't you think that's what will happen now that they have their cabin at Fraser's ridge? They will eventually have a community I think. Until that cabin burns down?

The way this show is now, the fire will probably happen in like 2 weeks or something. 

[Cdh20]

8 hours ago, ganesh said:

The way this show is now, the fire will probably happen in like 2 weeks or something. 

Lol, I hope not! It seems like a lot of work to build it again!

Edited December 31, 2018 by Cdh20

[Camera One]

So much for "fun time travel adventure".  I guess we're back to the regularly scheduled rape.  It's stuff like this that makes me question why I'm watching this.  There are so much other things they could be showing instead.

The Roger/Brianna wedding happened way too fast.  And they're making the relationship way too juvenile on both sides.  Neither was likeable during their argument.  I kept waiting for someone to walk in on them, so the whole wedding night stuff wasn't enjoyable either.

Why was Brianna asking that Bonnet creep where her mother was or whether she was still alive.  She knew to go to Fraser's Ridge, and that her mother would die in a fire.

The whole pending "who's the daddy" storyline is annoying to contemplate.

Claire's heroic surgery of the week was entertaining, though.  As was her gaffe with George Washington.

I wanted Murtaugh back, but the whole regulator subplot needed more development.  I can't buy his motivation as the leader yet.  Plus it's frustrating to watch this get Jaime into trouble.

Edited April 6, 2021 by Camera One

[gingerella]

Okaaay, I knew an episode I wasn't going to like had to be on the horizon because I've liked the past few and god forbid Show allows a Viewer to enjoy an entire season! Anyway...where to start?

Things I liked:

* Being updated on Fergus, Marsali and Baby Jemmy/Gemmy (sp)! That cheeseboard Marsali was prepping looked like something right out of Instagram or TikTok! I am really liking Marsali so much now but it does give me pause to wonder how someone as batshit crazy and psycho as Leery managed to produce two daughters who are level headed and absolutely delightful! Marsali is much more like Claire's daughter in terms of her demeanor, her wiles, her overall personality. I'd love for someone to say that to Leery so we could see her head explode and maybe then we'd be rid of that wench once and for all.

* Loved the hand-fasting ceremony, though I knew it was too good to be true that these two could have even one full night of happiness. Jesus H. Christ indeed.

* Any scene with Murtagh in it, though not happy about him continuing to live a life of outlaw/fugitive...it's not going to end well and I love Murtagh's character probably the most out of anyone on Outlander, which means certain death because Show cannot allow me to love a character for too long.

* I sort of/kind of liked Claire's immediate surgery only because it made the Asshat in Charge look at her with new eyes and respect. And I'm always for a misguided man to get served up some ass whoop by a fierce woman any day. But I also felt like I needed to drink myself into a stupor right along with Mr. Farniss, poor chap. I did rather love the look of not so humble pie on the faces of the physicians as Claire schooled them on modern approaches to severe hernias, huzzah Claire!

Things that made me go, HUH?

* Why does Jamie never introduce Claire as a surgeon? Yes I know it's not common at all to have a female surgeon at that time period but come on, 'Healer' sounds like she picks herbs and flowers and makes tinctures and treats common ailments, and he knows damn well she's a good deal more skilled than that. I wonder if she minds him downgrading her abilities to others because she never seems to say anything overt about it, which is so unlike the Claire we know. It chaps my ass.

* Why didn't the consummate researcher, Roger MacKenzie, place an advert in the Wilmington Gazette with a drawing of Brianna, asking if anyone had seen her? That seemed to me to be where that scene was going and then BOOM, nothing! It was all set up for him and he didn't do it. It seems so obvious that I wonder if they filmed it and edited it out, like all the other sensible things they've taken out due to time.

*George AND Martha Washington having zero British accents. That just seems ridiculous. Presumably his father would have had a British accent and thus so would he. I don't think that sort of accent would be lost in one generation upon arrival. I mean at that time most folks were likely from England, Scotland and Ireland so they'd all have accents of a sort. That felt like a deliberate dumbing down for Viewers.

* Fergus and Marsali's home looks very posh and well appointed for such a young couple. I know Jamie gave Fergus a bag of money and I assume a coin goes far during that time, but they look like they're living very well! I mean, a two room place?! And all the accoutrements? I think Fergus has his French sensibilities, which is good for Marsali as he seems to have good taste for the finer things. It just didn't seem realistic to me. Sort of like the apartment that Monica lived in on Friends was not realistic.

* I was surprised at how fast Roger found Brianna. If only they'd gone back to the inn and gotten their own room for their wedding night, all would have been a lot better.

* Roger, Roger, Roger, have you not learned yet anything about the Beauchamp women?!? If Brianna asks when you knew about the fire, you just tell her, 'Right before I left to find you, that's one of the reasons I came through the Stones'. Done and dusted. You fucked up there big time.

Things I don't like, or I know I will not like in the future:

* Oh Murtagh, WHY O WHY do you need to continue living an outlaw's existence?! Why can't you just go live in the NC woods with J&C and be a happy ol codger out there? Why Murtagh, why?!?

* Jamie & Claire, can you please, Please, PLEASE, P.L.E.A.S.E. stop the outlaw schtick too? It never ever ends well for you two. Claire, you need to look up that definition of insanity...and then live by that! Because you guys always getting mixed up in the bad shit is going to end badly for you two. Now I'm thinking someone sets their house ablaze to get back at them for now trying to work against the British as we roll into the American Revolution.

* Brianna's rape. That didn't need to happen, but again, these show runners seem to feel that every other woman was a rape victim back then. Maybe they were, I really don't know, but I get so tired of seeing it. I'm glad that we didn't have to see the details and I did f/f through it so I wouldn't have to see that but I note from other's comments it wasn't shown. The fact that Roger left Brianna alone in a blacksmith's shop, not realizing that she could come to harm as a young woman alone, in her shift, that was a stupid ass move.

* Brianna's Who's The Daddy storyline that you KNOW is coming. Will it be the love child or Roger or the rape child of Bonnet? Nobody will know of course because there is no DNA testing there so...But I hate that this is probably coming, it's such a cheap plot 'twist' that, if a Viewer sees it coming is not a twist at all, more like a contrivance.

* I'm thinking that Brianna's maid is going to assume it was Roger that raped Brianna because Brianna will be in a PTSD stupor, and Roger will be in deep shit and perhaps killed because she'll rally a posse to go catch him. People seem to get riled up into crown frenzies easily during this time period. Maybe if they had social media they'd have been less apt to get so keyed up about shit that doesn't affect them. And again, I've liked Rog most of the time (except when he's being an old school misogynist asshat), so of course he's probably not long for this world.

* I was pissed off at Jamie for getting Fergus mixed up in all the Murtagh/Regulator business. That could easily have gotten Fergus killed. No bueno Jamie, if you mess with Fergus you mess with me!

* Last but not least, and because it cannot be said enough, Fuck Bonnet, he needs to die already. But this episode also disproved my theory that B&R came through the Stones BEFORE Bonnet met and terrorized Jamie and Claire en route to River Run. He must have made it back to Scotland, and then somehow manages to captain a ship BACK to the place where he's a wanted man but now seems to be living openly and without worry of being arrested? WTF Show, do you not think we have memories of past episodes??????

[Cdh20]

@gingerella

 

I love reading your predictions! 

[Camera One]

5 hours ago, gingerella said:

Last but not least, and because it cannot be said enough, Fuck Bonnet, he needs to die already. But this episode also disproved my theory that B&R came through the Stones BEFORE Bonnet met and terrorized Jamie and Claire en route to River Run. He must have made it back to Scotland, and then somehow manages to captain a ship BACK to the place where he's a wanted man but now seems to be living openly and without worry of being arrested? WTF Show, do you not think we have memories of past episodes??????

I hate Bonnet too.  He's not even an enjoyable villain to watch.  I assumed that maybe there was very little information sharing about common outlaws among the various colonies?  And he's being very covert? 

[gingerella]

2 hours ago, Camera One said:

I hate Bonnet too.  He's not even an enjoyable villain to watch.  I assumed that maybe there was very little information sharing about common outlaws among the various colonies?  And he's being very covert? 

He is one dimensional and thus not interesting at all. As much as I hated BJR, he was a complex character and we wondered how he became the way he was. With Bonnet I don’t give a shit, he’s just a caricature of evil.

[Scarlett45]

@gingerella I understand why Jaime introduces Claire as a “healer”, it’s a less eyebrow raising profession for a woman in this time, and a typical person is going to trust a “healer” more than a surgeon. In a world where women weren’t even allowed in medical school, would you trust one claiming to be a surgeon- possibly her father/brother taught her at home, but it sounds fishy.

In a world without antibiotics, anesthesia (other than whiskey), sterile medical practices, surgeons were considered by many to be BUTCHERS. A very last resort to maybe save your life- if the infection didn’t get you first.

A “healer” actually has a chance to get to talk to people and earn their trust, and can better serve them.