Jump to content

S01.E01: Sassenach 2014.08.09

Add me to the list of people that loved the premier but hated the books. I'm a Ron Moore fangirl and when I found out he was making this I downloaded all the books and tried to familiarize myself with the characters. Pain.ful. I think I hated book!claire more than Bella Swan (let's let that sink in.)

 

I struggled through the first one, got maybe a 5th of the way through the second one and gave up on the rest. Still, I'm glad that I did because the characters are well presented (FLOVE TV!Frank). Love the use of music, the scenery, the direction. Can't wait for the next episode and intend to be here for the duration.

 

Deos anyone know if Ron Moore is doing podcasts ala Battlestar Galactica? 

5

Share Post


Link to post

I think she did know the date; otherwise how did she know to warn them of the English ambush? And now I'm wondering if she altered history by doing so.

0

Share Post


Link to post

 

Does anyone know if Ron Moore is doing podcasts ala Battlestar Galactica? 

 

Why did you do this to me?  I don't have this much time.  And some of the BSG podcasts were terrifying.  Let's make Dirk Benedict God, indeed.

 

The answer is that he did a podcast for 101, cause I'm listening to it now.

 

... and I finished and he's doing one for every episode or at least he closed with talk to you again next week.

Edited by ParadoxLost.
0

Share Post


Link to post

I think she did know the date; otherwise how did she know to warn them of the English ambush? And now I'm wondering if she altered history by doing so.

 

Frank didn't tell her the exact date, but that hill was a place where the English staged ambushes in the 18th century. So she just tipped Jamie off about it. She had a ballpark of the century from Randall's uniform and hair style. 

0

Share Post


Link to post

Thanks @Athena . I only brought it up because it reminded me of a Johanna Lindsay book I read, where the hero was the brother of Thor, and the heroine, present day college professor, who loved this one time in history, and then they went back in time, some soldier who was responsible for victory, turned into a huge loss for England, because said soldier fell in love with Rosalie, and was too depressed to lead his men to victory. This caused England to be even more puritan and prudish, so of course they had to go back and "fix it."

0

Share Post


Link to post
The answer is that he did a podcast for 101, cause I'm listening to it now.

 

 

And so ... where is it, please?

Edited by Nidratime.
0

Share Post


Link to post

And so ... where is it, please?

 

I knew someone was going to ask me that:)  I haven't figured a direct way to link it; but I found it linked on this page.

 

http://outlanderpod.com/

 

Look for the link that says Ronald Moore's podcast

1

Share Post


Link to post
Frank didn't tell her the exact date, but that hill was a place where the English staged ambushes in the 18th century. So she just tipped Jamie off about it. She had a ballpark of the century from Randall's uniform and hair style.

 

When Claire and Frank were visiting Rev. Wakefield, Frank was squeeing over records showing that Black Jack had been harassing the locals in the 1740s.  So if she accepts that she just met the man she's already got a time frame.  Combine that with the scene of Frank talking about the rock being a spot for ambushes and probably at least a passing knowledge of British history from being married to Frank, Claire can pretty easily deduce where she is within a few years.

1

Share Post


Link to post

I knew someone was going to ask me that:)  I haven't figured a direct way to link it; but I found it linked on this page.

 

http://outlanderpod.com/

 

Look for the link that says Ronald Moore's podcast

 

You can find it on the Starz Outlander page at the bottom under Extras. It's called Chat with Ron Moore.

1

Share Post


Link to post

I just listened to the podcast on my iPad while playing the episode on demand with the sound down. What fun! He's going to do this every week? I'm so happy.

One thing I learned from the podcast was a deleted moment from Claire's first encounter with Black Jack Randall. They shot a bit after she runs from him by the creek where he catches her and throws her on the ground and lands on top of her -- which is where he gets the inclination for a bit of rape, but she knees him in the groin and gets away. That's why they're both so angry in the next shot when he holds his sword to her throat and she spits in his face.  It also explains why her dress is so dirty. It's too bad they had to cut that when they were editing for length because a few people on these boards have wondered at Black Jack's "zero-to-60" decision to assault Claire, a woman whose accent identifies her as an English lady even if her clothes are confusing.

Edited by WatchrTina.
3

Share Post


Link to post

Damn, because I'm not watching enough shows already....

 

I had never heard of the books and decided to check the show out after Bear McCreary tweeted about it. I loved Battlestar Galactica, but didn't think I'd stick to Outlander. Then I watched the first ep, decided to keep watching, downloaded the books onto my kindle so I couldn't get accidentally spoiled by the internet. I have to use public transit for a few weeks, so I started reading on my way home Wednesday after work and finished the book on Saturday going back from brunch with a friend. Oops.

 

After having read the first book, I'm really curious how they are going to handle some scenes that are not going to be easy to shoot and I'm really looking forward to the score. The casting seems great so far and I like that they use dialogues directly from the book. I'm also a fan of not subtitling the Gaelic.

 

My sister watched the pilot and then said she'd have watched if it was a four part mini-series, but 16 eps were too long. Her take was that she didn't quite know where they wanted to go with the story and it was 'too Game of Thronesy' for her. Interesting, how different two people can see things.

1

Share Post


Link to post

I am totally oblivious obviously, since I had no idea bout this show until I ran past it on on demand last week and went "OMG OMG OMG" and had to watch it right this second!

 

Not disappointed in the least.  

 

I was a little anxious for the 40's stuff to hurry along and get to the time travel, but in hindsight I think it was really well paced and done.

1

Share Post


Link to post

I first started reading these books 12 years ago, and I am so happy that Ron Moore is doing the show.  I noticed his long time colleague Ira Behr in the credits as well, so I think we're in good hands.

 

I like show!Frank much better.  I was unsure of the casting of Claire, but I think she will work out well.  I liked everything but the Jesus H Roosevelt Christ delivery. For me, it did not work and took me out of the show, because I think that rather than say it as a continuous phrase as she did, that you have to angrily spit out each word individually one after another with a slight pause inbetween.  I always imagine Claire saying it that way.

 

Very impressed by the first ep.  Can't wait to see more! 

0

Share Post


Link to post

I agree about the Jesus H. Roosevelt Christ.  I had heard that criticism before I saw the first episode (we waited until it aired on TV) and I thought it sounded nitpicky.  After seeing it though, I agree.  It's actually quite a mouthful to say out loud.  It might just be one of those book things that doesn't translate as well to TV.  I'm curious to see if they keep having her say it in the series or change the way she says it. 

0

Share Post


Link to post

 It might just be one of those book things that doesn't translate as well to TV.  

 

As a book reader, I never liked it in the books either and I know at least a couple of other book readers didn't like it much either. I hope they do away with it in the show. It's a mouthful for the actress and it does sound unnatural. 

0

Share Post


Link to post

After listening to Ron's podcast I now understand that the continuity gaff I spotted in the scene outside the hut (raining one moment, not raining the next) was unavoidable as it really was raining off and on all night long.  It made me wonder about the line when Jamie says "it's a fine time of year for a ride" and Claire (who is getting increasingly soaked) kind of rolls her eyes.  I do wonder if that was originally in the script as a serious line and it became funny because of the weather or if they added the line spontaneously during shooting to add a mild bit of humor in the face of trying shooting conditions.

2

Share Post


Link to post

I can comment on this now, yay.

 

It didn't grab me right away, especially with the speech about the vases.

 

The ghost moment was one of the highlights of the episode.

 

It was nice to see Catriona Balfe "grow" into the role. I thought she was a bit awkward in the first half but grew into it in the other one. Also thankful it only took half an episode and not five.

 

The Castle Leoch comparison (ruins in 1945, complete and inhabited in the 18th century) gave me shivers.

 

Loved Dougal and the Mackenzie clan.

 

The only thing I disliked was the music during the chase scene. It made the whole thing quite unintentionally comical.

1

Share Post


Link to post

Haven't read the books.

 

So far this is worth watching just for the visuals alone.

 

Compared to most pilots, they did a good job of identifying the characters and establishing their personalities.  It also would have been very easy to screw-up the pagan dance and make it look like something from Spinal Tap, but they did a good job with that.

 

One thing I didn't understand was why the Highlanders had to be warned by Claire about a possible ambush.

 

I forget the name of the ambush location, but IIRC, Frank said the Britsh army used it in the 17th and 18th century.  So by the time 1743 rolls around, it's been in use for up to a century and a half.

 

Fool me once.  Shame on you.
Fool me, my father, my grandfather and my ancestors for generations on end.

4

Share Post


Link to post

Oh man. I don't know how I missed Ron Moore in the credits. I really didn't need to know he was behind this, nor did I need to know that he's doing podcasts for Outlander a la BSG. I'm never going to get the work done that needs to be done this weekend.

1

Share Post


Link to post

I haven’t read the books. To be honest, I didn’t even know there were books until after the first episode.

The Good:

The Intro Music: It gets you right into the setting. For me, a good intro is super important. This one hit me right in the feels. Amazing.

The Characterization: For me it was more important to get a feel about Claire and the relationship to her husband than to learn about the Scots. We will have a lot of time to get them to know slowly. I felt like I was right there with Claire. She knows her husband. So he is an actual character to her. But as a person from the 20th century people from the 18th century could very likely be… strange? Comical? I like that it gave me the feeling to be out of place. Like Claire must feel. Yes, she is in the know. But does that really help her?

The voice-overs: The helped me alot to connect with Claire.

The accents: I am german but did an internship in England once. My landlady and a work-colleague were Scots and the heavy accents reminded me so much of them. It made me also wonder if we hear the different kind of accents there are in Scotland (e.g. The Glasgow accent is quite different from the Edinburgh accent. At least to me).

Claire: I hope Claire stays the way she was presented in the first episode. I always argue that, to be considered a strong and self-assertive woman in a tv-show you do not need to be a man-hating raging bitch. I also liked that she right away realized what happend AND that she knew that she would try at first to rationalize it away.

Jamie: Not only is he hot but actually seems to be interesting. I like it when I want to know more about a character I am supposed to care about. Hotness only goes so deep.

The bad:

Jesus H. Roosevelt Christ. Didn’t make sense to me but I guess that it was there for book readers.

Over all I really really enjoyed the first episode. The tone set by colors, music and overall tone sucked me in, in a way that I only know from „GoT“ and „BB“ so far. Love! The acting was superb, and I hearted how the gaelic sounded like the actors used it everyday. I love that you can rewatch multiple times and see new things. I really hope that the shows stays this excellent and doesn’t get to confused with itself. (Looking at you Borgias).

Edited by chysalis.
5

Share Post


Link to post

I don't know. I really didn't feel the chemistry between Claire and Jamie

Jodhabai,I agree. Jamie is pretty but seems callow. Frank has possibilities...but his ancestor Jack is a jerk. Not sure where all of it is headed but I won't be sorry if romance take a back seat to other themes.

 

(I love your name, by the way; is it a ref to the movie?)

 

I love the adaptation of *Over the Sea to Skye.* Good to adapt a song about a bonny prince to a wee lassie who happens to be a commoner. 

 

What I love most of all so far is the Scottish backdrop. Reminds me in a heartwrenching way about one of my fav shows of all time, *Monarch of the Glen* (most of it on Netflix, where I watched it). That show ended way too soon, IMO.

Edited by nyxy.
1

Share Post


Link to post

The premiere was okay, but the narration was so.heavy.handed.  Almost everything narrated could have been accomplished or communicated through acting.  A man and wife reunited after 5 years apart during a war they both took part in?  We don't need the blow by blow, the audience can put together that there is awkwardness and hesitation.  It can even be a part of the dialogue, but it SUCKED as the narration.

I'll give this another episode, but if I'm yelling at Claire's voice to shut the fuck up so I can watch the show in peace, I'm out.

1

Share Post


Link to post

Narration did not bother me in the least, so different strokes, I suppose.

For me it kind of set a tone and a mood- a bit of reflectiveness that I enjoyed.

 

As I've mentioned before, I watch with a husband who has not read the books and has no idea what is going on most of the time. The narration helped him a lot as he has a tendency to not pay as close attention as I'd like.

The first episode of anything has a lot of exposition-y hurdles to overcome and I'd rather they go too far than not far enough- then all the non-bookies would be complaining about being confused.

8

Share Post


Link to post

What a good perspective you are able to have @Pestilentia - it has to be hard to be a book reader watching with someone who isn't.  Like your husband, I am stoked there is so much narration, helping me through the tough parts.  I think they have been well placed.

 

The pace of the show, since this first episode is not too fast, I appreciate that.  It's letting me really get into the story.  That is very good writing to me.

3

Share Post


Link to post

That's funny because I thought the pace of the episode was pretty brisk. Which was fine with me. It seemed that TPTBs wanted to get Claire back in time pretty quick, so they overused the v/o in order to establish the relationship with Frank. Once she went back it moved. Black Jack, Scots, castle. 

 

It worked for me actually. I don't think I would have wanted Claire going back as the ender of the episode. Getting to the castle was a good call.

1

Share Post


Link to post

My husband's a non book reader for both this and Game of Thrones.  While I could have probably done without a fair bit of the narration, I do think it probably saved me a lot of answering "who is that?" and "how does she know that?" and let me just enjoy it all.  There's a lot of exposition and setup to get through (as with all first episodes) and it's nice for once to not have to spend another 20 minutes after the episode ends explaining all the finer points of what we just saw.  Game of Thrones, especially the battle at the Wall, I'm looking at you.

5

Share Post


Link to post

Much talk of Claire's costume upthread.  The one thing that didn't make sense to me - why did she run off without her shawl?  When she got up from the ground next to the rock, it was clearly there.  I've been in the Highlands in early September, and even then it was chilly enough to want long sleeves or a wrap of some sort, let alone late October.

 

Beyond that nitpick, I'v loving this show.  I've watched only the first episode so far, but I'm looking forward to more.  I confess to watching with closed captions, which helped a lot!

Edited by zoey1996.
2

Share Post


Link to post

 

The one thing that didn't make sense to me - why did she run off without her shawl?

I think the implication is that when she woke up she was disoriented and frightened and hurried away from the stone in a daze, not realizing that she was leaving her shawn behind on the ground.

1

Share Post


Link to post

So having finally gotten time to start with this show, I must say that I am impressed as well as a bit annoyed. The production quality is astonishing and the flow of the episode was great. Not sure how you can make a pilot better since the narration really did help me a lot (not having read the books nor read any previews). They also had a few 'repeat' situations which was good and got by with few characters. I'm also glad that the episode didn't present me with mysteries and questions to be uncovered throughout the season. That's so lost and it really does dampen the enjoyment of a show if you have to ponder all the time.

 

I do not get the criticism that "the travel back in time wasn't as horrible as it was in the book". What would that have achieved that was necessary for the episode? Does it make her not go back later on in the book? Then you can bring it up at that time. For the moment, her cluelessness as well as the voiceover of the car crash was sufficiently impactful for me. It's more artistic and I really liked that decision.

 

But I can really see the criticisms of "romance". I could very well imagine seeing Jaime on the cover of one of these booklets that "40 year old woman buy at the kiosk". Because come on. It's not so much the romance that is the problem, but the "tropeyness" of the situations. Of course when she is sent back the protagonist finds a handsome scottish man and of course the first english soldier she finds does try to rape her and you just know that it'll be love and happiness and everything. Not saying it has to be this way later on, but it was a bit dissapointing after the multi-layered, 'fresh' and intriguing depiction of a relationship in the 1945 part.

 

But yeah, the show convinces and I'll definitely watch the other episodes.

3

Share Post


Link to post

 

you just know that it'll be love and happiness and everything.

Without spoiling anything I can assure you that, no, it won't be love and happiness and everything.  Not by a long shot.  As in life, shit happens.

4

Share Post


Link to post

Good, I love that. It makes the story interesting. That "depth" was also the impression I got from the first half of the pilot, so I do believe you. I was just expecting a bit more friction in the second half, but I'm gladly gonna watch the second and next episodes for that :)

0

Share Post


Link to post

Have never heard/read the books but heard good reviews for this show. It premiered on Showcase here in Canada on Sunday, so watched the episode and overall really liked it! It did drag a little with the set up of Claire and Frank's marriage resuming after 5 years.

 

The narration I actually like as it seemed to flow nicely for me and also gave one Claire's thoughts. I hope they keep it, honestly.

 

Frank questioning Claire about having a relationship - hmmm.. my first thought was that he himself had a dalliance, as he mentioned it would be understandable, yet Claire never questioned him on his own possible affair(s) during the war.

 

I loved the transition of Claire's 1940's dress looking like a shift from the 18th century. Very clever costuming.

 

And Jamie (Sam Heugan.) Wow. That's a good looking man. I like the bits of humour with the Scottish "gang", and how they respond to Claire being demanding/forceful/swearing like crazy.

 

I did find it weird that the British were trying to kill/attack Claire though. She's a Brit also and could be an important person or whatever. I mean, Randall has no idea who she was - what if she was a prisoner of the Scots and had just escaped. She could have intelligence on their movements, who they are. Instead, he attacks her. Strange.

 

Overall, I liked in and looking forward to more. Unfortunately, I'm two episodes behind due to the airing.

4

Share Post


Link to post

-How old is everyone supposed to be?  Claire appears to be maybe early 30's, Frank appears to be late 30's, Jaime appears to be late 20's.  Is that right?

 

I just read the book last week (I decided to read it before watching the show, and was able to find it at my local library), so this is something that caught my attention in the pilot. I'll tag it just in case, as it is book-related, though I wouldn't really consider it to be much of a spoiler. In the book 

Claire is 27, Jamie is 23 (his youth, references to him as a 'young lad', etc remind us of this often), and I think Frank was about ten years older than Claire.

. Sam-as-Jamie is a bit older than I'd pictured Jamie, but otherwise his portrayal fits my image, and he seems to bring not just the HOTT, but also the charm and depth (esp in the preview for ep2 that was shown just after ep1).

0

Share Post


Link to post

 

I do not get the criticism that "the travel back in time wasn't as horrible as it was in the book". What would that have achieved that was necessary for the episode? Does it make her not go back later on in the book? Then you can bring it up at that time. For the moment, her cluelessness as well as the voiceover of the car crash was sufficiently impactful for me. It's more artistic and I really liked that decision.

I agree with this.  

I've read these books as they've come out and I'm quite sure that the horrible-ness of the time travel seems to get worse each time its done.  And wouldn't that total disorientation of an accident as a child be horrible to that child without having to spell it out?

 

oops, sorry.

Edited by Linderhill. Reason: Book Talk.
0

Share Post


Link to post

I haven't read the books, although I heard about the series more than a decade ago and had always thought that I might try reading the first book some day (though I obviously never got around to it).  I loved the pilot and am completely sucked in.  The casting is great (I think the lead actress is fantastic), the writing seems solid and the production values are top-notch.  This is probably the best Starz series that I've seen (I had a lot of fun making fun of The White Queen last summer) - glad to see them step it up against the HBO's and AMC's of the cable world.

2

Share Post


Link to post

I just watched the first episode last night and even without the storyline, I would watch this show just for the scenery. I really love that they are shooting on location instead of trying to make one place look like another place (I still don't understand why Graceland is set in Los Angeles but shot in Miami - just set the damn show in Miami if you're going to shoot there!). Right before Jamie said it was great weather for a ride, I was watching the mist swirl around them and shivering at the thought of how cold it must be.

 

I thought the transition from Claire's 40s dress to a shift was great (although I did wonder how her belt just magically fell off). Even before I saw how I cold it was later, when she woke up and left her shawl on the ground, I was already yelling, "Don't leave that perfectly good wool shawl behind! You might need it!"

 

Re: stockings - I remember stories about women drawing lines on the backs of their legs to simulate French seams when stockings were no longer available during the war (as someone else mentioned earlier) and how they tried really hard to keep the lines straight to make it look as real as possible.

 

I haven't read the books but I am considering it after the season ends. I'm really weird about books that are made into movies/shows. 99% of the time, I find the book to be better so if I haven't read the book before watching the movie/show, I like to wait until afterward because that way the book seems like an improvement. If I go the other way around and read the book first, the movie/show usually seems like a letdown or I get distracted/annoyed by any changes or whatever was left out. Does anyone know if they plan to do one season per book? Or will they stretch it out to two seasons per book?

 

ETA: I forgot to mention how much I loved the druid ceremony. It was really beautiful and also beautifully shot.

Edited by ElectricBoogaloo.
1

Share Post


Link to post
Does anyone know if they plan to do one season per book? Or will they stretch it out to two seasons per book?

One book per season is the plan, and it is definitely what they've done for season 1.

0

Share Post


Link to post

 Does anyone know if they plan to do one season per book? Or will they stretch it out to two seasons per book?

 

One book per season is the plan, and it is definitely what they've done for season 1.

 

Season one is being split into two and we'll have at least four months between part A (1-8, ending in a couple of weeks) and part B (sometimes early 2015). 

1

Share Post


Link to post

I haven't read the books but I am considering it after the season ends. I'm really weird about books that are made into movies/shows. 99% of the time, I find the book to be better so if I haven't read the book before watching the movie/show, I like to wait until afterward because that way the book seems like an improvement. If I go the other way around and read the book first, the movie/show usually seems like a letdown or I get distracted/annoyed by any changes or whatever was left out.

I'm the same way (Oh how I loved the Poldark shows, but then I read the books....) and as someone that has read all but the last book, think I that is a great idea. Edited by DoughGirl.
0

Share Post


Link to post

I think I mentioned before the show even aired, that I'd read only the first two books and a third of the third before giving up years ago, so watching this, I wouldn't be pulling my hair or gnashing my teeth over differences.

 

However, watching and discussing, has made me want to go back and read them again. I think enough time has passed and I can sort of tolerate reading in first person nowadays, heh. so, I got the first book, which is on my to be read file, which I'll do after the finale.

0

Share Post


Link to post
Season one is being split into two and we'll have at least four months between part A (1-8, ending in a couple of weeks) and part B (sometimes early 2015).

Thanks for the info! I guess that means I have until S1 ends next year to decide if I should read the first book. Man, that seems so far away.

2

Share Post


Link to post

Thanks for the info! I guess that means I have until S1 ends next year to decide if I should read the first book. Man, that seems so far away.

 

Weel, I got the Kindle version, which has...Jamie on the cover. I suspect any new reissues in hard copy will be using pictures from the series...which, on one hand, is sad, because I love the original covers, but then, Jamie....'nuff said.

1

Share Post


Link to post

I really enjoyed this, and was glad I watched. I went through a weird cycle -- heard great things about the show, read the book and didn't love it (I became very very tired of the repetitive sex scenes), then almost decided not to watch the show after all. But I caught the pilot and so far am pleasantly surprised -- I liked it a lot and thought it was gorgeously shot and produced. I also love the casting and think everyone looks wonderful. 

 

On second watch (or third or fourth, I just keep watching it, lol) I'm more and more impressed with Tobias Menzies. Caitriona is wonderful and very well cast but watching Tobias play both Frank and Jack in the same episode really shows off the actor's range so well. This is the first thing I've seen him in and I think he's fantastic.

I've loved Tobias Menzies ever since he made me care about Brutus in "Rome," and I thought he was a real surprise here as Frank -- he made me care about the character far more than the book version. I loved the way he had this quiet yearning toward Claire that he almost seemed unable to express -- they were lovely and believable together as a couple.

 

Cate Blanchett, except brunette?

To me, Catriona is a dead ringer for a young Helen Mirren, only with dark hair. It's funny how many people she seems to look like! But she's really striking and it's so great to see a new face. I think she's perfect as Claire.

 

Reminds me. How funny was it that when Claire was asking for disinfectants the Scotsmen were clueless... until she mentioned alcohol. Oh yeah, alright, got it.

That moment made me laugh out loud. Just the totally mystified looks they all had until she said, "ALCOHOL?" and they all looked so reassured and happy about it.

 

Add me to the list of people that loved the premier but hated the books. I'm a Ron Moore fangirl and when I found out he was making this I downloaded all the books and tried to familiarize myself with the characters. Pain.ful. I think I hated book!claire more than Bella Swan (let's let that sink in.)

You're not alone! This was pretty much me as well (I didn't hate Claire though, I just got soooo tired of all the sex, which I know makes me a total anomaly). But the great thing is, I was a total BSG fangirl yet I actually hadn't heard that it was Ronald D. Moore until the opening credits, so I was totally gobsmacked and pleased that he was at the helm here. It really makes me hope I continue to love the show despite my feelings for the book.

1

Share Post


Link to post

Have you guys listened to "The Scot and the Sassenach" podcast's commentary track for this episode yet? They're going to rewatch all the episodes and put out commentary tracks for them. This one was fun, and there were a few insightful things I hadn't thought of yet.

 

My favorite thing they brought up, I forget which one of them said it, but when ghost Jamie (or whatever he is) is watching Claire in her window, he disappears right as the power goes out. So think of the symbolism there...Claire is plunged into darkness when Jamie disappears. I watched/listened last night, and I'm still thinking about that. It's deep.

1

Share Post


Link to post

 

Have you guys listened to "The Scot and the Sassenach" podcast's commentary track for this episode yet? They're going to rewatch all the episodes and put out commentary tracks for them. This one was fun, and there were a few insightful things I hadn't thought of yet.

 

I'm so glad someone on this forum mentioned this podcast. It's definitely been a great way to get through #Droughtlander

0

Share Post


Link to post

Hey UK -- where are you?  I was hoping I'd see a sudden burst of activity on these boards from Brits and particularly Scots who finally, FINALLY get to see the show.  I'm going to assume you are all busy binging on the first 8 episodes.  Enjoy!  

 

Meanwhile, back on topic, it is amusing to re-read this board and recall how I was feeling back then -- so uncertain that they were going to get it right, unsure of the names of the TV characters, not quite sure it was going to work, still not completely in love with the Sam and Cait as Jamie and Claire.  Now I'm filled with nostalgia.  Ah, remember the first time I heard Jamie say "Well, I suppose that means you're coming with me" and I squeed with glee?  Good times.  Come on April 4!

Edited by WatchrTina.
3

Share Post


Link to post

Ah, remember the first time I heard Jamie say "Well, I suppose that means your coming with me" and I squeed with glee?  

 

Still quite possibly my favorite part of the first 8 episodes! Or top three at the very least. If I'm nostalgic for anything, it's Jamie's hair in the first episode.

4

Share Post


Link to post

Still quite possibly my favorite part of the first 8 episodes! Or top three at the very least. If I'm nostalgic for anything, it's Jamie's hair in the first episode.

Yes! The hair, the blood, the swagger.  It was his peak hotness.  I wish they would go back to that look. 

 

I remember feeling bored a bit even though I liked it. I think I was just so impatient to get to everything. In subsequent rewatches I love this episode.

0

Share Post


Link to post

 

It was his peak hotness.

I must disagree with you peacefrog.  That moment was in the top 5 for sure but if I had to pick one moment of pulse-quickening hotness it had to be in episode 3.

I'm talking about the look of unresolved sexual tension in Davy Beaton's surgery.  The unbuttoning of a collar.  The eye-sex. Be still my beating heart.

 

But that moment the first episode -- definitely top 5!  And yes -- that was the best hair.  I'll bet they go back to it after 

Jamie gives himself a hair-cut at a certain key moment in season 2.

Edited by WatchrTina.
1

Share Post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now