Sunday, January 13, 2019

MOP Video: Outlander Starz Episode 411: If Not for Hope

18 comments:

Annette Sailors said...

I think they deliberately brought Bree and Roger to the past as naive, innocent, and unprepared so we could actually see them grow. Roger's experience with the Natives, from the beating to the gauntlet, is his test by fire. He can not be the staid university professor after this. Bree is taking a little longer but will emerge as our Bree.

Lord John would NEVER have had relations in the house. The slave quarters made sense in the book because, hateful or not, that was the culture of the times. I can't figure out what the writers were thinking or what led to the pantry decision. Maybe we aren't supposed to think about the characters going potty. No snake in the privy; no seeing Lord John in the slave quarters when Bree goes to the privy.

As to Fergus, it seems as if he has been gainfully employed prior to not being so. Perhaps, he had never had to really look for a job or face the fact that, because of his hand, he may not always be employable. He almost sounded confused as to why he wasn't hired. This may be the impetus that finally sends them up the mountain.

I'm hoping that Bree can free Murtagh when she visits Bonnet in jail. Otherwise, Jamie will try.

Enjoyed the live tweeting and the recap! See you next week!

Susan said...

There is a comment by Claire in the book that Jaime has no grey. So, they are just following the books on that one.

LuanneW said...

I don’t know, I really loved this episode and didn’t find it slow ar all. I love you girls but maybe I’m tired of analyzing the episode bit by bit and hearing from different sources all the negative comments? I simply want to watch the show and enjoy it. Here’s what I loved about the show:

How they got you at the beginning with Roger in the shower! My first thought ... they didn’t change the plot! But then we soon find out he was just dreaming about a having a nice hot shower. Who wouldn’t after literally and figuratively being dragged through the mud?? Good scene.

We haven’t discussed who found the stones in America . It probably was Roger on his trek with the Indians. I thought how they woved that into the story was clever.

Absolutely loved the entire “night at Joscasta’s house” ... I found it heart warming and funny and laughed out right at many of the looks of the gentlemen especially when Lord John walked into the room. Boy, Lord John is one handsome guy!!!

Loved the exchange between him and Brianna. Don’t remember if it happened in the book as far as the engagement but made for some good TV and talk among the book readers. He does comes across as a strong man but a honorable man as to come to the rescue once again.

They had to write a scene where she finds out the secret of Lord John. She would have had a chamberpot in the room. So, she wouldn’t go our wandering in the middle of the night looking for a priviy. But to go down to the kitchen for a bite to eat because you are pregnant and hungry is actually more realistic. So, low and behold, to find someone having a tryst in the pantry would not be that far fetch. And from what I can remember, it was the Judge at the dinner who obviously had “secrets” to hide.

I’m sure Murtaugh will get out of this mess as Jamie and Claire get out of all the messes they create. Even in the books, I always asked myself,”Don’t they ever learn?” But wouldn’t make for good fiction otherwise, huh?

Unknown said...

Hi gals: Posting again as anonymous for some odd reason... go figure.
1- The Forbes guy you can't remember his name is the GREAT Scottish actor Billy Boyd. Loved seeing him there. Remember Lord of the Rings? OK

2-. Totally agree with Carol about Swoonie LJG. Hold me back.. He just takes all of the air out of the room whenever he is in it. All the other coots are like "who invited HIM to this party?".

3- Totally agree with Tracey about LJG NOT having sex in the house and definitely NOT in the pantry. Not OUR LJG. These writers never read the novellas, clearly. But nor do I like the idea of the slave quarters. I didn't care for that at all and I'm glad that they didn't do the whole colonial oppression "I'm the white colonialist so I'll just go get me some black arse" thing... I would have been so offended.... and I think that they avoided it and I really understand why. BUT that said, doing it with Alderdyce in the woods... or having Bree come upon the two of them saying good night coming out of each others rooms in a disheveled fashion would have done the job just as well a'la 50's movie fashion. It's not the fact of gay sex but the fact the LJ would NEVER have been caught dead doing it in the pantry while a guest in someone's elegant home. Nope.

4- Otherwise, given the parameters of the television series, the need to suspend reality to a certain degree etc. I was OK with the River Run scenes and anything that involves Lord John being Lord John works for me (especially with I can rewind....Gawd but he is beautiful).

5- Also loved the Marsali/Fergus/Murtagh connection... Hoping that Murtagh isn't in for it. Sorry Tracey--- Hoping that Stephen gets his comeuppance a book or two early.

6-. Scenes between Jamie/Clair/Ian- Ian is so cute. Claire subdued is at least better than Claire when she is being superior...but I wish that she had a bit of middle ground instead of only two notes. I thought that Jamie looked thinner than he had on the Ridge... that is what I put it down to...rather than younger...thinner. The bridge of his nose was very sharp edged- or at least I noticed it to be so. They are on travel rations, maybe.

7- I do love it when you are punchy. Lots of fun! We are in for a LOOONNNNGGGG doughtlander. I'll miss you.

BostonBarb729 said...

Ladies, LOVE your commentary every week, especially when you get silly (like my sister and I often do).

If I was Bree I would be a little nicer to Auntie because I would never want to leave Shangri-La (Err, I mean Cross Creek). "Go to the ridge - are you serious? Why would I feed livestock and shovel shit if I can sit on the veranda sipping my wine all day - while drawing? I will invent the postcard by sketching little scenes on mail to send the parents. I have managed without them this long - what's another 20 years? I love being spoiled. After all, I am the 200 year old baby."

Have a great week, everyone!

Anonymous said...

Redheads don’t go grey the way the rest of us do, rather their red gradually fades. I have friends in their 50s who are natural redheads who don’t have a single gray hair on their heads. But their hair is not nearly as vibrant as it was in their 20s. Picture it as going from a coppery red to more of a bronze-y red.

LesA said...

The whole "pantry thing". I agree - totally unnecessary and I can't wait to see Matt & Toni's lame excuse "we thought it would be neat if". I think they should have done is as in the book, with LJG leaving the slave quarters. But, without Bree's "inside her head monologue", it is hard to explain for those viewers who miss the point. I DO Have an issue with the original scene in the book, though - there is NOTHING that would indicate the sex of the "slave", and I don't recall whether the men and women were in separate quarters, and was it ever made clear that it was the MEN'S quarters he was leaving?

It was gratuitous, and I was insulted by it.

AnnF said...

I thought at some point they would loop back to Roger being captured at the stones to indicate whether he changed his mind on going through or if he was snatched away. Did anyone else notice that he had some stylish Mohawk boots when they arrived at their camp? It also improved the short pants look.

I think it’s going to be a huge complication for Bree if she marries LJ as how is she going to leave the marriage if Roger is rescued. I think she should have negotiated more time by just having Jocasta say that her husband was captured — no one would have known that she is only handfast. Ok, until Lizzie blurts it out lol.

I also liked Marsoli’s lines in this episode. It’s obvious they should head to the cabin to relieve Tom Burley of the chores.

Anonymous said...

AnnF: I agree that that scene was missing. The previous episode ended with the cliff-hanger: will Roger go back to the 20th century or not? It needed the clarification that the Indians got to him before he could make the leap. Roger had to wrestle with deciding to stay on the chance he could ever find Brianna again and reconcile, or give up and go back to the safety and comforts of his previous life.

Anonymous said...

I am pretty sure the conversation between Marsali and Murtaugh was actually a conversation between Jenny and Jamie when he was leaving for the rising. Ian turned Jamie down and told him he would stay at Lallybroch and guard his weak side.

Anonymous said...

Hi Tracey & Carol. I’m so glad to hear you didn’t really care for this episode either, because as I’m reading the opposite on Twitter, I’m shaking my head.. I don’t get why people loved this episode because there were so many problematic things wrong with it. The pacing was weird, the amount of time spent on Roger and J&C was so unbalanced, that it almost would have been better if they just left Roger out of this episode, and pick up where we left off in the next episode.

The problem with Broger is that they have not spent enough time to establish that relationship. No one is invested in it…not even Bree. Lol.

MAJOR issue #1. The LJG thing. Not only was it an insultingly gratuitous scene, it was totally unnecessary IMO. Wouldn’t Bree have gotten the same idea about him had she just stumbled upon him kissing Alderdyce? Wouldn’t have figured out his sexual orientation just by that? Now, I understand why they changed it to a contemporary instead of a slave. I think the viewers may have been very offended by LJG sneaking out of the slave quarters because it could be, and probably is, considered rape. A slave has no agency over themselves and would not have the ability to actually say no to him. Wouldn’t that be rape? I know DG wrote it that way, but I think on film it would have looked much worse and diminished his character. BUT doing it in a public place, something that he himself says is a crime was just ludicrous!

MAJOR issue #2. Claire would NEVR have said those words to Jamie that she can no longer promise to be truthful to him. Say what?? Has Claire forgotten that she made a VOW to Jamie forsaking all others and that she had already chosen Jamie over Bree when she went back through the stones? Nope. Nope. Nope. Poor Jamie has spent 2 months thinking that his daughter hates him and that his wife doesn’t trust him, and that he thinks SHE thinks Frank is a better husband and father than him. Grr…

Looking forward to next week's recap. Marian

Backfence said...

Because the ‘sipping wine on the veranda’ thing would be at the cost of other people’s freedom and the result of Jocasta’s views on human bondage. Bree’s conscience wouldn’t have allowed for that.

Backfence said...

I agree, Lesa. I think simply seeing them kissing would have impressed on Bree that maybe, just maybe, LJG liked men. Also, considering the ramifications of his sexual orientation, Lord John would likely be very cautious of where and when he ... indulged.

Anonymous said...

I love, love, LOVE how punch-drunk-tired you are and I look up and its only 35 minutes into the recording!

~Dee

Victoria said...

Not a book reader so … I think if she marries LJ & Roger shows up, she can file for annulment on the grounds that the marriage was never consummated. If Roger doesn't show up, LG will have even stronger ties to Jamie as his father in law, in possession of both of his children & his grandchild. That's a win for LJ. Roger WILL come back though, there's too much story left for him not to.

Anonymous said...

It took me a long time this week to get around to listening to your discussion, but I am 100% in agreement with Carol (especially) about the unnecessary gratuitous nature of the pantry sex scene. There were so many other ways Brianna could have made that discovery, but the location of the sex taking place was totally unlike Lord John Grey's character, history, or even his good manners. He would never risk being caught in a public area within his hostess's house. I went on and on about this on Twitter this week and in my regional FB group. Casual sex, yes. Reckless, never. Bad manners, never.

And how many times does it make it now that we've seen Claire swoosh her hair back so we can see what's going on for the Jamie/Claire sex? I know - let Jamie be on top for a change!

And, yes, that tent was/is ridiculously big, but I guess it'd be hard to have 17 crew members in a pup tent for filming! :-P

Your amiga in Costa Rica,
@Yr_Obt_Svt

Anonymous said...

Forgot - I had thoughts about the ramifications of they had chosen to have LJG coming out of slave quarters
1) they would have to have had production create slave quarters to show that and
2) it might have stirred up discussions of either white privilege and/or unequal social position along #MeToo lines of conversation. Maybe they wanted to avoid that.

@Yr_Obt_Svt

Unknown said...

Carol and Tracy, I love your interaction. You come up with the funniest comments and your laugh is so contagious! I am here sitting down in my living room with my headset and I get tears in my eyes with laughter. My husband is a closet-Outlander fan. He asks me to play your show on Monday mornings.
Regarding the episode, you are spot on in your comments. LJG's image in the pantry doesn't leave me!!! First, he makes this entrance at the party looking like Zeus, and next we see this dashing man in a very private situation and in the pantry of Jocasta's home!!!!! Totally unlike LJG.....Which writer had this 'brilliant' idea?
Claire.....looks like Claire, but is certainly not behaving like the Claire that puts Jamie first...Claire wouldn't tell Jamie those words. Their bond is what we like about the story.
Carol and Tracy, thank you or making my day some days,
Eugenia E.