Carol Blogs. Tracey Tweets. James Alexander Malcolm Mackenzie Fraser means to take his time about it, aye?
I just finished watching your recap and again loved your giggles. I thought this episode was AWFUL! So few minutes for a jumbled bunch of Lallybroch scenes and way too many minutes spent on Lord Lovett and Leery! Frankly I thought Lord Lovett looked like Walder Frey on GOT and thought he was going to lock the doors at dinner and kill them all! No, no, no to having Leery in the story at this point. Jamie tells Claire years later that he would have never married Leery if he had known her part in trying to burn Claire. Leery always referred to Claire as the witch. This episode really took a seriously bad turn. I love the laugh track you inserted. It really fit so well into that scene. Claire told Jenny to plant potatoes when they parted in the woods after searching for Jamie. There was a lovely book scene of a potato cook out after the harvest when Claire sat holding Jenny's baby while all the folks had potatoes for the first time. At least you gals made the recap enjoyable. Thanks.
I missed a potatoe cook out too!
They overdramatized Leghair's role in Season 1 not knowing if there would be a Season 2. Now, planning for future seasons, they had to do something to explain why Jamie would marry her after knowing she is the reason Claire went to Cranesmuir.
SPOILER ALERT . . . Unless the story is that Jamie comes back from the future and is the one shocked to find Claire married to Laoghire, I don’t see how the writers thought that this episode properly executed the needed course correction from season 1’s Laoghire storyline.Once again, Jamie and Claire are in a Scooby-Doo situation where their initial plan doesn’t work. Claire goes into scheming mode, because it always works-out for Claire to make a plan . . . her looks are Daphne but her brain is on par to Thelma, right?!? So after telling- off Laoghire by describing how she pities her, which wasn’t in the books but felt kind of good in a strange, guilty way . . . Claire has no qualms to use Laoghire to manipulate Young Simon, by saying that perhaps Jamie could be persuaded to start to forgive Laoghire. Are we supposed to feel good about Claire right then . . . or not? So Claire is starting to forgive Laoghire? Are they going to braid each others hair next?Not once, but TWICE in this episode Jamie tells the viewers/Claire that he doesn’t find Laoghire to have a shred of decency or the possibility of redemption. He then tells the viewers/Laoghire he’s offering a thank you for reasons of which he is unaware; simply his wife, who he adores, told him to do so. Ahhhhh . . . . my brain hurts. I don't get how that conversation leads to the decision of "I,James Alexdaer Malcom McKenzie Fraser take thee, Laoghaire cra-cra girl who tried to have my wife killed, as my "awful wedded wife" (Sorry, I couldn't help the Four Weddings and Funeral joke!) I write this as someone who liked all the additional scenes added to the series . . .just not how this was executed.
Hilariously stated....loved Four Weddings
Yes!! Garth from Wayne's world, ABSOLUTELY- the young Lovett's doppelgänger! Hilarious! Agree, this was like a big, comfy chair...chance to catch our breath for a minute and gather our thoughts. :) Fabulous commentary as always ladies!
Enjoyed your podcast, as usual! I had no problems with the Laoghaire storyline. I actually like the way they are handling things in the show better than the way things went down in the books. I never did buy in to the fact that Claire simply didn't think it was important enough to tell Jamie about her involvement at Cranesmuir. Makes more sense to me that she did tell Jamie instead of carefully editing her out of the account she gave him after the rescue. The script originally had Mrs. Fitz orchestrating things between Claire and Laoghaire but they weren't able to get Nell Hudson and Annette Badland on set on the same day. BOOK SPOILER: I don't think it was really necessary for them to "redeem" Laoghaire in Jamie's eyes because it is irrelevant to the storyline in Voyager. It's not like Jamie married her for love. He just went along with Jenny's plan because he simply didn't care much about anything at that time. Whether in the books or in the show the only reason why Jamie would be stupid enough to marry Laoghaire is temporary brain death.Promises
I totally agree with you on the reason Jamie married Laoghrie - he is, after all, a compassionate man. He took a beating for her, for heaven's sake! He pitied her situation, he had lost Claire forever, in his mind, he had lost William, and really, why not? No, I wasn't crazy about all the scheming, but all in all I did not hate episode 8.Carla
But he didn't know how awful what she did to Claire
I thought young Simon resembled the sneezing priest who married Jamie and Claire crossed with Pippin from Lord of the Rings.
Spot on compare! Pippin Priest Young Fix
Oh my yes same hair!
Hi Tracey & Carol! Thank you for taking the time to do this recap. I love the discussion and the different perspectives.I feel kind of silly admitting this but I really liked this episode! Maybe it was just such a relief to see C&J working together again that I was more willing to suspend disbelief.I watched the episode "on demand" and they had a commentary by Ron Moore and Anne Kenney at the end. Anne Kenney did say that they brought "Leery" back in the way they did so that it wouldn't be so unbelievable as to what happens later. However, I don't think there is anything they could do to make Jamie marrying her more palatable/acceptable/semi-understandable as it was in the book.Anne Kenney also referred to the scene with Jamie and the baby as "catnip" which I thought was cute. And true. I loved the actor that played Lord Lovat! He had such an awesome old-man laugh. The interactions with Lovat senior and Jamie were just great.I wonder if/when they will announce a Season 3? Is it typical not to have an announcement at this point? Have a great week all!Lisa
Thank you both for a fun commentary. Great remarks on the "episode from hell", which is what I now call ep. 208. Spot on! It's written like a bad sitcom, and makes Jamie and Claire look like idiots. The whole episode is a "jump the shark" mess (except Lallybroch which was too short!). The storyline really seemed to break from the writing style we've seen in any other Outlander episode; the Watch was completely fabricated but still "felt" like something that would have been within the world of Outlander; is did not! From Jamie welling to give up Lallybroch and announcing that his wife is a witch to playful schemes with the woman that tried to have Claire killed; it was all ridiculous and completely negated everything that happened in one of the best episode written, The Devil's Mark.I will keep watching too, but honestly at this point, I'll be watching through my fingers to see what else they screw up.......or get right.
Thanks again for the recap. I enjoy them so much.SPOILERS...This episode pissed me off. After listening to RDM's podcast, I trust him less with this adaptation. Lollybroch - way too short. Not a comfy chair - more like a backless three legged stool. What about Jaime and Ian having a rip roarin' heart-to-heart? A glimpse of Mary McNab? All the great shows [Sopranos, Six Feet Under, Deadwood, Mad Men, etc.], while maybe not adaptations, give viewers some breathing room and deepen the relationships between the characters. It seems as if RDM is racing through the plot and grudgingly willing to occasionally give us a nibble of roasted potato that fell on the floor.Laoghaire and Claire's stuff - just. awful. It will be studied in the "how to f up adaptations in really juvenille ways" classes. I know the writer did the best she could based upon the mess they made in S1 and eerily telling conditions re: actors' availability but, ugh. They did NOT redeem anyone and I can't imagine how they can justify what would come next if they follow the actual story. I'm OK with some changes - I even liked Scotland's got talent. I LOVE more Murtagh - I'd be thrilled if they saved him. I read about a dream sequence they didn't do that sounded interesting and trippy - was intrigued. BUT... what they've done this episode diminishes Claire now and Jaime later unless they just change it ALL. That said, the acting was great and the casting of Clive Russell was brilliant. I'm looking forward to meeting LJG and seeing BJR again in a new context. As I write this, I realize that they have a LOT to cover and it's all very heavy shocking stuff - so I wish them well, but I feel too that they need to listen to Diana!
Also, your laugh track was brilliant!
"All the great shows...give viewers some breathing room and deepen the relationships between the characters. It seems as if RDM is racing through the plot and grudgingly willing to occasionally give us a nibble of roasted potato that fell on the floor."Amen! When I hear "TV is a visual medium," and about how adaptations have to be molded to fit into that aspect, it often only sounds like excuses to cut the heart, emotion, and intelligence out of excellent source material. Outlander is NOT a Marvel comic. There is MUCH more to it than simply action/adventure - as response to last week's episode should have proven. Though action, adventure, and history are part of the story, it is the emotional heart and the human relationships that are its greatest strength. Diminishing those aspects of this story not only insults the viewers' mental and emotional intelligence, it diminishes the quality of this series.
YES! I really wanted to see that conversation as well. I felt like you got a sense of how close they were. Right now Jenny and Ian are like the Scottish Holiday Inn. The relationships are so shallow. I would have traded the "Jamie with the baby" scene for that in a heart beat. Maybe the rubbing of the hand was the only hint we get that Jamie is still coping.
Awful,this one was really bad.It had no flow,it felt hacked.
Hi Tracey and Carol,Sending much love from Germany. I adore your recaps – they are fabulous. And I sometimes enjoy them more than I actually enjoy the episodes you are talking about. Your recaps and your views on the episodes always ad to my experience with the series. Many thanks for the good work!I have to say I liked 208 very much – and the questionable Laoghaire-Plot, the lack of a “fulfilling” sex-scene and the “Madame Blanche”-storyline could not alter that impression:- It was SUCH A RELIEF to be back in Scotland again!!!!!- For once not having to watch another episode with a constantly bitchy, bossy, chin-trusting, forehead frowning, overly melodramatic, humorless Claire was a relief. I was starting to feel a bit embarrassed about my favorite female character (and that for me includes Clair’s portrayal in some parts of “Faith”). In this episode Clair finally rediscovered at least a bit of her sense of humor, was able to acknowledge that her husband had lost his a child too and also seemed to remember (maybe because of needy Laoghaire) that she actually adores and loves her 17th Century husband.- The Frasers were finally back at what they do best: holding each other’s back and deeply caring and fighting for each other and the ones they love. They were back at being pragmatic (not melodramatic), proactive, ever moving forward, ever hopeful - despite the virtually impossible task ahead and without the strange 20th Century disposition for depression and PTSD that they were forced to act out (by whomever) during their time in Paris. If there will be a season 3 of outlander I hope that they manage to keep Ron Moore a bit more out of the editing-process AND the writers room. His editing style, his decisions of what scenes/lines to cut, what storylines to emphasis and his general view on what is in the center of Diana’s books, his understanding of the main characters and how they should behave and how they have to be transformed to meet the needs of a television audience didn't feel right to me for most part of season 2. And I am not even a vivid book fan. I think there are flaws in Diana’s books too. I would be very happy if they would concentrate on addressing them instead of changing/rearranging what is fabulous about the books.That beeing said: I LOVE the series and the visual world created by Ron and his team and inspite of the difficulties I sometimes have with the writing, the plotting and editing I will continue to watch. I have come to love the main cast - and the casting of the supporting characters have been absolutely flawless in both seasons.Thank you again for taking the time to recap Outlander and looking forward to hearing your thoughts next week.Clara
"I think there are flaws in Diana’s books too. I would be very happy if they would concentrate on addressing them instead of changing/rearranging what is fabulous about the books."One more big "AMEN!" from me.
Clara - make that 2 AMEN's. Excellent point.
Amen! to Clara's comments!
Geez, this episode really let me down. I was so looking forward to some healing time at Lallybroch, but we only get three minutes before Jamie gets the letter from Jared. Oh, but we had PLENTY of time to waste on Laoghaire, didn’t we? UGH! Diana revealed that what was under debate (shark-ish?) was the first Claire and Laoghaire scene, and that Claire's reaction to L's plea for forgiveness, though still very un-Clairelike, was toned downed from the hair-pulling, face-scratching, cat fight Ron had planned. Diana said she had commented on the script that the problem "is that Claire is not a vengeful bitch." I didn’t like Claire’s response to Laoghaire (that wasn’t our Claire), but I would have really hated to see her reaction turn more extreme.Yes, Tracey, the time frame is VERY screwy here, and the VO telling us that Jenny had another baby while J&C were in Paris is the first clue that things are way off. Jenny gives birth to Maggie shortly before Wentworth. We assume that Claire must have conceived Faith around that same time. J&C are supposed to have returned to Scotland a few weeks after Faith’s (premature) death. So, Jenny squeezing out baby Kitty in the tween time doesn’t make any sense. We KNOW Faith dies in 1744, and J&C are back at Lallybroch for the fall harvest of the potatoes (still 1744) - BUT Jamie suddenly receives a copy of Prince Charles’ declaration broadsheet from Jared, along with the info that BPC has landed in Scotland (historically, August 1745), so we have SUDDENLY jumped at least ten months ahead in time! However, that baby, the one we were told was born while J&C are in Paris (1744), – and the SAME baby Jamie talks to at night – should be a toddler if we are now in summer 1745. Also, Jamie shouldn’t be saying that Louise “will bear” Charles’ baby – because if we’ve jumped ahead, that baby should already be born. Somebody really screwed up this timeline! When there are historical dates and events that the show must line up with, you would think they would be less reckless with their own timeline. My big complaint is not enough time at Lallybroch! We were robbed! I was so happy to see us back in Scotland, and especially back at Lallybroch. After the disappointments in Paris, especially after the loss of Faith, didn't we all need healing time at Lallybroch? I understand time and production constraints, but we have been given SO many minor scenes along the way that waste time and give us no heart, much less an advancement of the plot. Dildo sales? Body painting whores? Laoghaire?!! I need more of the scenes that speak to the heart - and I REALLY needed more Lallybroch. I suspect we will get LOTS of battle-rated scenes, but this was our last good chance for a period of peace and happiness – and we got less than three minutes! I did love the Jamie and baby scene, but hearing how much it took to convince Ron not to cut it, really illustrates how little he understands that we NEED those quiet, “comfy chair” moments! Apart from the timeline, Claire's very "un-Clairelike" response to Laoghaire, and the fact that the series felt no need to further address the rape of Fergus, there ARE some things about this episode I do enjoy. I love the return of the J&C relationship – and yes, a longer love scene at Lallybroch would have been perfect in this episode (robbed, I say!) I love all of the scenes with Jenny. What a treasure Laura Donnelly is! Lord Lovat is as oily as I imagined him to be, and it is good to see Colum again. But, that’s about it. Just no to all the Laoghaire crap, and HELL NO to Jamie ever considering turning Lallybroch over to an unscrupulous old reprobate like Lord Lovat!!Our Lallybroch time was too short a respite. Tough times a-comin’, folks. Oh, well.Dolittle
I'm still totally confused by the show's time line. In episode one when we see Claire with Jamie again getting off the boat, it shows them arriving in LaHavre, France in 1745. So how is Faith dead and buried in 1744?
Those 1745 time stamps in eps. 201 and 202 were a mistake and have since been corrected. I stream episodes through Starz in Amazon video, and was able to go back and check for the correction. But, yes, many people were confused by that.
Mystery solved! Thank you!
I think the timeline only matters to book readers, and is not that big a deal. As for Fergus, he did grow up in a brothel, and was no stranger to what happened to him. Children wee not all that valuable in the 18th century, and were put out to work early in life - whether in a brothel, on a farm, or in trade. Even wealthy families had nannies and governesses, and did not play large roles in the raising of their children.
Thanks for the recap girls! Ok, about this episode. I was so happy to be back at Lallybroch but it was SO incredibly rushed. I really think Ron Moore does not get the heart of the story. It's super important to him to be as graphic as he can be with every rape scene, but he doesn't understand that the key to everything is the relationship between Jamie and Claire. Honestly, that frustrates me. He'll do a rape scene and even show a thrust on poor Fergus (very upsetting to me), but won't put in the time for a love scene between Jamie and Claire after all we've seen of their disconnect in Paris?! Fade to black? What the heck?! This is Starz! I will say I liked Jamie a whole lot better in this episode. His little bits of humor and decisiveness help. That being said, this time I felt like they didn't capture book Claire. But this has been coming since book one where they changed the way Claire responded to laoghaire, hello the crazy slap! I hated the new Laoghaire storyline. We needed more time in Lallybroch, less complete rewriting of the book! If we have a season three, at this point I have no confidence Ron Moore will care about being true to the story. I didn't like the dramatics with Claire playing the witch. It's sort of felt like another 'mastermind Claire to the rescue' moment. I did like the return of colum. He's a great character. Lovat was great. But meany manipulative Claire again with Laoghaire was uncool. Claire isn't one to be vengeful. She's just not. Sometimes to a fault! So... There were a few moments I really enjoyed in this episode, but in the end I felt it was sort of ruined by Laoghaire's return. And we were robbed of a love scene that I really think the show needed at this point.
Brandy you are right on!
Hey Tracey and Carol,Love your recaps, they're like going to Cheers for me (you wanna be, where you can see, our troubles are all the same) Even though, my opinions don't always match yours completely, I feel like you guys get it and aren't afraid to voice your opinion and do it in a fun and funny way.What worried me most about this episode is that it is a course correct for other plot changes they've made in the show. They've changed the McNab story and they've changed the Laoghaire story. Now, I'm afraid they're going to have Laoghaire instead of Mary McNab in the cave scene. Please... if that happens, I hope they fade to black. I don't think I could take it (cue, "My eyes, my eyes!" from Friends).I wish, if they couldn't get Annette Badland for the Ms. Fitz scene at the time Nell Hudson was available, that they would have rewritten it with just Ms. Fitz. To take a page from Tom's book, "If you can't get Fitz, call the plot change quits." Instead, they are making Laoghaire like an obsessed character out of "The Young and the Restless." I agree with Clara, I really didn't like some of Ron's editing choices for this season and I hope he continues to listen to his team and take their suggestions to heart more frequently... in one of his podcasts with Matt, it sounds like he is coming to the realization that it is good to listen to the opinion of others and he's not too proud to take their advice... I just wish he'd do it more, especially where Diana and Merrill are concerned. Still very thankful for all they've done, love the actors, scenery, costumes.Also very thankful for you two, Carol and Tracey. When I get upset with the series, and feel like I'm in Outlander Purgatory, I can come here, listen to you two, have some laughs, think of the TV series' changes as "interesting" instead of disappointing and realize that I've still got the books.Colleen
Thought your recap was hilarious, and I love that. I'm happy reading all POV's but it's easier for me to go with the, hey it's a TV show adaptation. I am very confused as a history buff - the timeline is now crazy, but again, I am going with just watching TV whether I remember from the books, or skiped over many parts. I understand people's opinions who are more invested with the source material, and I get the varied comments.Keep it up - wonderful work. jefsantamonica
So...what they did with Laoghaire was a big hint that they are prepping for Season 3? Does this mean there be a Season 3?
Is the idea of Leghair instead of Mary McNab in the cave just a rumor or is there some basis for this? That would suck and is a horrible thing to even contemplate. I hope the writers/execs read this and nip that shit in the bud. SO wrong on so many levels.Also, they better not get rid of Mr. Willoughby. Voyager is a HUGE awesome story and they need more than one season to do it justice. The characters we meet there are wonderful and if they *give it the time it deserves* they could have something special for all time [and... do some very interesting and even arty stuff in the Caribbean without screwing up the story].No one wants the series to cover all the books [and novellas!] more than I do. I hope they realize that they must to slow down and allow the amazing conversations [LJG, Roger, Ian, Jaime, Briana, Hal, Tom Christie & Claire, Rachel, religion, science, suicide, etc.] time and space to bloom.
I agree. The beautiful part of the books are the development of the characters. Season 1 captured well the essence of these characters. This season it feels rushed, yes, there are many new and temporary characters but it feels just the same. Of all the books I look forward to Voyager the most. It truly may need 2 seasons to cover or at the least more episodes.
Yes! Two seasons!
Great recap as usual! Yayyyyy! Back in Scotland!!!! I wish I lived at Lallybroch....I didn't mind Leg Hair showing up as part of the plot, I just do not like her so I was yelling "Nooooooo! Not Leg Hair!!!!" at the screen when she came on. I finally got my husband to watch with me and he looked at me like I was crazy. I didn't believe a word she said in her "apology" to Claire but I admit I was surprised at Claire's reaction. In reading the comments above, I would have been absolutely shocked if it had turned into a cat fight - that really would've been out of character. When Claire was manipulating Leg Hair into trying to manipulate Young Simon, I was uncomfortable because that approach also seemed out of character for Claire. I understand that it was expedient and time was of the essence but still. AND it was a dumb idea!! So stupid and juvenile like a sitcom! Y'all pegged that! After Leg Hair told Claire what happened with Young Simon, my husband added the line of dialogue for her "I mean, I can't work miracles, ya know!" Lol. The shirt smelling scene was creepy and then just weird. At first I thought it was Colum's shirt and she was just making sure it wasn't mildew-y smelling because she'd left it in the washer overnight... HeeheeI'm having trouble seeing how this episode will actually help with future events. Just because Claire may appear to have forgiven Leg Hair doesn't mean that Jamie has to or will later on. Just like when a friend hurts one of my children's feelings, they forgive that friend much quicker than I can... Haha. And that's just silly kids stuff, not an almost successful murder attempt. So if that's why they put this storyline in, I will be interested to see how they show Jamie's change of heart. PS. There's no way that Season 3 is a question mark. Mark me! Season 3 will happen! And I can't wait to see Voyager come to life!
SPOILAGE ….I wanted more of them at Lallybroch! It was so nice to see them back in Scotland and talking to each other. Claire was back to being Claire. I really like how she treats Rabbie and Mrs. Crook. Yes, comfy chair indeed. I thought the Laoghaire stuff was unnecessary and sort of “meh”. By Season 3, the audience won’t need any softening up. By the time Jamie marries her, Leghair is a widow (twice, no?), has two kids and doesn’t seem like she’s had had happy marriages. She doesn’t even like sleeping with him, but clings to him because of her circumstances. At that point, I think the audience can give the teenaged Leghair a pass. She’s a sad woman. Claire’s forgiveness really did come way too easily at this point … as far as Claire knows, Laoghaire helped to have her pregnant friend burned to death. Given her recent loss, why wasn’t she more angry? Also, would young Simon, the son of the head of the clan, really have been encouraged by the attentions of a kitchen maid? The guy was raised in a house where these women probably worked 100 hour weeks, didn’t look like something out of a Pantene commercial and could easily be forced to do anything. It was weird filler straight out of daytime soaps.I don’t remember Lord Lovett wanting Lallybroch in the book (early Highland B&B ambitions???). I do remember young Simon being a lot like his father though. He was a jerk and called Claire “honey lips” and Jamie cracked him one. Maybe I’m alone here, but I really miss Book Jamie’s ability to deliver a satisfying smack down when necessary. I was shocked when TV Jamie let the Comte throw coins at him a few episodes ago or let Randall close enough to bite him. Book Jamie’s beserker moments are epic. If they are concerned about viewers, they should stick to what Diana’s written or seriously consider her input. Whether it’s a fight , torture, sex or babies, she writes it all beautifully.
I also was wondering about young Simon, son of the head of the clan, having to be encouraged to seek the attentions of a kitchen maid ... huh? The kitchen maid had no power even if she was a visiting one. And Claire introducing him to the maid was even more ridiculous. The show really did jump the shark in this episode.
Great recap!! I love the discussion about the laugh track...so perfect. I couldn't believe that 3 minutes into the show and J&C had yet ANOTHER caper...ugh! Love the scene with Jaime talking to the baby in Gaelic...so wished they would have just let Claire watch him...the Jenny monologue was unnecessary.Loved seeing Fergus with them in Scotland, although I don't understand why they put so much make up on him.Lord Lovat was excellent...mean, dastardly, cunning...just like the book Lord Lovat. Another great casting choice!Laoghire...here....really? Why? I read somewhere that this was the "jumping the shark" moment that Diana was referring to. Apparently, she had read some early scripts and they had a full-on beat-down between Claire and Laoghire which would have been a vast departure from Claire's persona (and a true jumping the shark event). However, they dialed it back and Claire only said it instead of actually doing it. But still, that was out of character for Claire, because she truly sees Laoghire as immature instead of as a threat. And did this really make us feel it is okay for what is going to happened way, way, down the line between Jaime and Laoghire? Are they planning to bring that up in Season 3 (assuming there will be one)? Having her here at this time in this episode makes no sense.La Dame Blanche...in Scotland? Where Claire was once on trial for being a witch? And then Claire pretends to see a vision...oy.As I've said before...I know the show will be different from the books...that is understood. However, all I ask, is that if you give me something different....please make it better (more clearer) than the book. If Lallybroch was boring in the book, make it interesting in the show. France (to me) was boring in the book; there were some interesting things added although they were in France much longer than necessary (IMHO). With all due respect to RM, DG, and the writers, sure they are telling the story, but they are butchering it something terrible. This episode is a great example of that.
I read an interview with Ron Moore the other day and he said he doesn't really read or pay attention to viewer comments. I really wish he would!
Therein lies the problem.....I wish he would, too.
It's obvious Ron Moore doesn't pay attention to fans opinions. He seems to hold the book fans somewhat in contempt.
I'd have to disagree. After reading so many viewer comments the only conclusion he could possibly arrive at is that there is absolutely no way to please all of the book readers. For 20 years the book readers haven't even been able to agree with what happened in the books! It would be futile to even try. Diana is serving as the barometer, alerting them to any serious departures. She doesn't appear to have half the problems with the adaptation that some book readers do (nor do I). Ron's job is challenging enough to get this story told on time and within budget. He doesn't need to wade into the peanut gallery.
I agree there is no way he could make everyone happy, but he and the writers have gone so far astray from the characters. So many examples of "wtf" moments.... Also as someone mentioned above, he seems to have contempt for the book readers. Doesn't sit well with me.
"He seems to have contempt for the readers" is someone's opinion, not fact. An opinion that I do not agree with. I also disagree that he and the writers have "gone so far astray" from the characters. I think they've done a wonderful job with this adaptation. I like the characters and their relationships just as well if not more than depicted in the book. The statements above are nothing more than your opinion, which you have a perfect right to have. But you cannot treat them as fact, because they are not.
Hi Carol and Tracey: Love, love, love your video blog...you provide endorphins by making me laugh, and Lord knows we can never have enough endorphins.A couple of "answers" to some "questions" you brought up in your videoMaril Davis said on Twitter that 7 months have passed since they returned to Lallybroch. That time line is screwy because that means that Jamie and Claire would have already been back at Lallybroch when the potatoes were planted. Now, I'm no farmer, but I don't think they take more than 7 months to grow. So Jenny saying to Claire, I'm glad you told us to plant them makes no sense. And in the book there was a big todo about them because no one knew enough about them in order to know how long they took to harvest. Maril also responded to the upset fans asking why they cut the love scene short, but she said they never even filmed the rest of the scene...so not cut, just not planned.The name you remember Jamie calling baby Katherine in the book is Wee Kitty, but in the show scene he says “Mo gradh Caitriona”. Plus in the book, Claire sees him talking to Kitty but feels like she is intruding and returns to bed. The next morning she wakes up with Kitty in the bed WITH them. If I remember it right, Claire takes Kitty back to Jenny and meets her in the hallway where Jenny has the conversation about how you can say anything to a bairn.Colum definitely was not at Lord Lovat’s. Claire runs into him somewhere later…I forget where…when he tells her Leghair was married off and did she want him to have her husband beat her for her involvement in Cranesmuir. I think the show has placed Colum there for a dual purpose. One to bring the “redemption” of Laoghaire’s character (according to Anne Kenney) back into the story so Claire could “forgive her”….there is no other way what happens with Leghair down the road would be believable based on how they portrayed her in S1. Secondly, I think we needed to see Colum looking ill. BTW, they HAD to bring Laoghaire back for Jamie to see that Claire has forgiven her….as ridiculous as that is...in order for the story to continue as it does in Voyager. There would be no other way that the audience could swallow what happens in S3. So, I think they really jumped the shark in S1 by making Laoghaire more involved in Cranesmuir. In regards to Cranesmuir, I think Colum had something to do with Geillis being tried for witchcraft and Claire was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. But, he decided to kill two birds with one stone and forbade Ned from helping Claire. However, as we know, Ned went anyway.Now for GOT: Tobias is Edmure Tully, the groom at the Red Wedding. He has been imprisoned since then. He is Catelyn Stark’s brother and they are the neice and nephew of Blackfish Tully. So Lord Lovat is playing BJR’s uncle…if you will. LOL
Great and funny recap! When watching the stupid Leery scene I couldn't help but think of Elton John's song "Benny and the Jets" lyric: "she's got electric boobs..." Because Leery must have SOME bazookas since she used them to trap Jamie into coping a feel and changed Simon into a MAN. How silly. Jumped the shark was a good analysis. I hope the show gets back on track. BTW your laugh track was perfection!taz
Hey, Tracey and Carol Great recap as always. Just went back and re-read a little to refresh my memory. Claire and Jenny don't have that conversation about Jamie and Kittie - that's her nickname! - until the next morning, but no worries. I totally understand time constraints and all that jazz. What I AM worried about SPOILER ALERT!! are the scenes explaining Frank's actual genealogical lineage - couldn't find it, and I'm wondering if all that with Alex went down in Paris? I'll have to check again.Also, I'm stressing about the travel to the Prestonpans battle. They MUST show all that with Jamie and Claire discussing her knowledge, meeting Lord John, and all that went down - they CAN NOT leave any of that out!I was also thinking about that "Fourth Wall" stuff. In Caire's case, in DIA, the audience is actually Bree and Roger, am I right? Anyway, did not hate this episode, just wondering how and if they are going to wrap it up in line with our expectations. I won't complain (much!) because I LOVE, LOVE this opportunity we book lovers have to see our beloved story come to life. Keep up the great work, girls!Carla
Spoiler-ish: Ok, I've watched it again, and I have this to add: I sincerely believe this particular episode is for non-book reading viewers. We book readers already know everything there is to know. We know Claire and Jamie as grandparents, we know their family, their deepest, darkest secrets, and we know ALL they have been through. Outlander the (wonderful, I might add) TV series is also written for folks who are tuning in to a story they know nothing about. It has taken us 25 years to learn what we know, and sometimes, as has been noted in above comments, we've even been a little bored. We have skipped through to what we feel is the meat (and the process is different for each reader, I'm sure) of the story. The writers of Outlander the TV series are doing that too. Compressing, omitting, adding to the tale to make it understandable, but most of all compelling enough to tune in each week. I get it. I'm thrilled with the results of their efforts. I loved the books, and I love the show. Can't wait for Voyager!Carla
I love Sam and Laura Donnelly scenes!! I've read that in real life, they have known each other and worked together for years and I think it really shows in the sparkle of their performances together.I also LOVE their height difference. Because she is almost a foot shorter than he is, the camera angles automatically aid in the description of an imposing, impressively tall Jamie, and sets up the natural playfulness of their brother/sister relationship. Jenny is still the "big" sister and won't be pushed around. I sometimes miss that large visual of tv Jamie because even though Sam Heughan is tall, so are a lot of the cast members.As always, thank you Tracey and Carol for the recaps. MOP has become such a fun part of my Outlander experience. Its a wonderful blend of humor, discussion, analysis and information. I so appreciate your time, energy and commitment to making it happen!!
Great recap as usual, full of snorts and giggles. Loved Lord Lovett but wished we could have seen the false teeth in the fire scene. I'm trying to remember why he wanted Lallybroch and I think it had some thing to do with the location of Lollybroch and what this meant to access to Lovett's property, or something like that.The whole Leery reappearance didn't bother me but Claire's reaction to her was pretty bizarre. I do think Jamie had to know about her part in the trial. I never really bought the fact that book Claire never told him but Claire including her in the plot - a big no.I'm with you Carol, if we don't get to see those three riders approaching Lollybroch and the "Daddy, who is this woman?" I'll be throwing my TV across the room.THanks for taking taking time to entertain us every week and keep us on our Outlander toes.
Lallybroch sat at the head of the only mountain pass into the Highlands for 10 miles in either direction. Besides the feud itself that was one of the big reasons that both Lovat and the MacKenzies coveted the estate.Promises
True about both families wanting Lallybroch. Book Jamie wasn't given the option of sign over Lallybroch or I rape your wife. The offer was swear allegiance to Lovat or rape. Allegiance meant paying tithes and supporting Lovat. Jamie wanted to keep control of the Lallybroch men. We had already been through Jamie's opinion about oath swearing to Colum and the MacKenzie's. No way would he swear. J&C got out of that trouble with Lovat by trickery. The signing over of Lallybroch by TV Jamie seems a bit far fetched, he would never.
Hi all - this is going back a ways but I wanted to share it. For the first several episodes of Season 2 there was a lot of comment about how the writers and directors have messed up Jamie and Claire, how Jamie was much less resilient than in the books etc. (where is his "unflagging joy" etc.). Looks like Sam and Claire were party responsible for that! This is from an interview with Sam and Tobias with Backstage (Diana Gabaldon posted the link on her Facebook):"And Heughan and Balfe were both concerned about Jamie and Claire’s relationship at the beginning of Season 2. The last episodes of Season 1 found them struggling to reconnect after Jamie’s rape at the hands of Capt. Jack, and the finale saw the pair sailing to Paris. But when Heughan and Balfe read the first scripts for the new season, they went to the writers.“It felt like [Jamie and Claire] got over what happened in Season 1 and there wasn’t enough of a hangover,” Heughan recalls. “And we went back to them and actually, they completely reworked it. It was great to see [showrunner] Ron [Moore] going, ‘OK, we can delay that and move this forward here.’ It’s great fun to be able to have that influence on the script!”"I wish they hadn't done that! But, what's done is done. I'm glad we have two more seasons to look forward to after this. Kristine
Correction: Sam and Cait I mean!!
Yes I agree. Saw that "Backstory" interview and it slowed things down in France greatly.
I CARE! Although this week I was behind. I missed what Ron called the potato festival. So sweet what they did when the potatoes came in. I love those "armchair" moments. Don't need drama all of the time.
I so hope that the folks I see worrying about Laogharie replacing Mary McNab as the person that comes to the cave and Jamie has sex with his last night before going to Ardsmuir are worrying for nothing. It would make no sense to change that especially since that would in turn change way to much in Voyager not to mention later books. I've even seen some worry that they'll make him one of Laogharies kids father bio wise if they changed that scene. I know Joan is born in 1753 the yr that Jamie goes to Ardsmuir and sleeps with Mary but there is no way they'd change who her father is. I know Ron likes drama but I hope he wouldn't change any of that and I sure as hell hope that Diana wouldn't let him considering how many books it would effect if she did assuming they were to make it to s5+ which they should the show is popular enough.
Great points, alyce. I would hate the change. I mean...I'd REALLY hate the change. I'd have to seriously contemplate continuing to watch. (WOW, did I just say that?? Yikes.) I am going to hope for the best and try not to get caught up in the contemplation!! 😊👍🏻
Trying to not get caught up in the contemplation does seem for the best for sure. To bad they can't just cut the Mary part out I mean I know its brought up in book 6 but when you get down to it her part in Voyager with Jamie wasn't as huge as the parts later on with Geneva and Laogharie are to the story in Voyager and beyond.