An Outlander Community
Saturday 9:00 PM on Starz

Outlander S01E03: "The Way Out"


Outlander broke with the books this week with an entirely original B-plot that ramped up both Claire’s healing skills AND her notional association with the devil. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves, let’s start right at the top: with Frank putting his wife on the train to the front lines as he prepared to hold down the fort at home.



This was exactly the kind of beige supporting-player nonsense we’ve come to expect from Frank, an exasperating “conflict character” who exists only to give Claire a sense of urgency with regard to going home. If she didn't feel like Frank was being inconvenienced, why would Claire bother leaving her current situation/Jamie, especially considering her sweet gig as a cozy castle doctor who’s a good 200 years better at her job than everybody else on the planet? 

Then again, Claire probably didn’t have to give a thorough butt massage to any of the soldiers she treated on the front lines. It’s not all mead and bannocks at Castle Leoch.



In return for Claire’s healing touch, she got invited to listen to the bard whisper and strum his auto-lute in the great hall, where she had a little too much Rennish and started trying to play matchmaker with Jamie and Laoghaire.




This is such a uniquely female impulse, to “place” a guy you’re interested in into a relationship with someone else. I can remember my own intense ferocity in trying to set up my own hubs with a college roommate a decade or so back—and really, what was I thinking? Probably whatever Claire was thinking, as she all but mashed Jamie and Laoghaire’s lips together during the zither recital. But despite Claire’s best efforts, Jamie only chatted with Laoghaire and then asked Claire to go change his bandages in the castle cellar. 


I’ve said it before, and I’ll probably say it again: These two have hotter chemistry than a million periodic element charts crackling in the flames of a billion Bunsen burners.

From there we segued into a storyline that never happened in the book: A kid who went up to the “Black Kirk” got sick. Everyone said he was possessed by the devil, but Claire was like, “Or we could try to figure out what’s actually wrong with him?” She hastened to the village to see the lad—who, like everybody, was related to Mrs. Fitzbibble.


The mom and Mrs. Fitzpibble were like, “The Priest has got this. Continue with your regularly scheduled program, Nosy Buttinsky.” Claire went home heavy-hearted, and on top of feeling like she could do nothing to save a dying child, she ALSO glimpsed Loaghaire and Jamie making out in a corridor. BUMMER!



Claire later tried to passive-aggressively tease Jamie about what she'd seen, and his gruff stable boss Angus unleashed an Ann Landers column of relationship advice on her: “Stop teasing the boy about Loaghaire or he’ll be pressured into marrying her, when in fact he needs the partnership of a wife who is a grown woman, not a light-minded teenager, considering the fact he is an outlaw dealing with a lot of personal trauma. He needs an older, knowledgeable, possibly professionally driven doctor-type woman. You see what I’m saying, Claire?” I'm paraphrasing, but that's basically what he said. It was like, "DAMN Angus, let’s take you back to the 1940s and set you up as a marriage counselor." Who knew rugged Highlander warriors had such searing insight into each other’s romantic needs? So cozy.

Still, Claire took in only the admonishment, and in a fit of pique escaped to the castle gardens to have a good cry. The voiceover told us she was jealous of Jamie and Loaghaire’s intimacy and she missed Frank. Okay, sure, that’s it. Whatever you have to tell yourself, Claire.



Claire was cheered up the next day by a visit to Geillis Duncan, the wise woman who serves as a primitive Walgreens to Castle Leoch. The party abruptly stopped when Claire looked out the window to see the 18th century happening in full force: A child who’d stolen a loaf of bread was about to get his hand lopped off.

Luckily, Geillis was married to a textbook Falstaffian buffoon who happened to be presiding over the child’s case. Gyllis performed a wee bit of a lap dance and her husband was able to lessen the boy’s punishment to a mere, “Nail his ear against the stocks and he can leave whenever he feels like tearing his head free.” Naturally, Claire was horrified. When Jamie arrived to escort her home, they cooked up a little plan: She would distract the ghoulish mob that was watching the boy cry, and Jamie would remove the nail so the kid could leave the ordeal with only a medium-sized gauge in his ear. The plan worked beautifully, although if i were a villager and had an excuse to stare at Jamie, no amount of toppling Sassenatches would pull my attention away from the gingery planes of his face.





On a roll, Claire then asked Jamie to take her to the Black Kirk. This was another scene that didn't happen in the books, but it was delightfully picturesque (did you enjoy the visible breath as they spoke?! It must've been FREEZING when they filmed!). When Jamie told Claire that kids who visited the Black Kirk liked to eat the “wood garlic” that grew around the ruins, she realized Mrs. Fitznibber’s nephew was suffering from plant poisoning and somehow threw together an antidote from Geillis Duncan’s curative essences, then hastened back to the village to show up a beastly priest.

When Claire’s hastily-thrown-together medicine actually cured the boy, the village priest was weirdly angry about it (if you are a Black Adder fan, maybe you recognized this glowering cleric as the otherwise-delightful actor Tim McInnerny, who played Lord Percy). Clearly, there will be a reckoning, but in the meantime, Claire is suddenly the castle’s new “Miracle Worker.” Speaking of working miracles, Claire was also apparently able to whip together a passable curl cream from Geillis Duncan’s essences before the next evening session of whispery lute-playing.




The episode closed with Jamie translating the ballad to Claire; it was a folk song about a woman who was torn from the man she loved at the standing stones and ended up in a faraway land, but then returned to the man she loved by going back to the standing stones. Claire, on a bit of a Nancy Drew tear, decided then and there that she was done earning brownie points from Collum and the other Scots in the distant hopes of them one day taking her back to Craigh Na Dun. She was going to sneak there herself or die trying! Guess a little folklore and seeing your crush make out with a teenage airhead will do wonders for your motivation, eh Claire?


QUESTIONS:

... Have you or someone you’ve known ever set up a guy you sort of liked with someone else? 

... Gyllis’s husband: exactly right or a little overdone with all the farting?

... Book fans: What did you think of the new storyline? Does it make you more excited for new material going forward, or uneasy about potential inaccuracies in upcoming plot points?


Previously Aired Episode

AIRED ON 7/9/2016

Season 2 : Episode 13

73 Comments
Comments (73)
Submit
Sort: Latest | Popular
It was Murtagh who rebuked Claire about 'Loghair', not Angus!
Reply
Flag
A few things, although not specifically about this episode:
1. Claire has been flirting with Jamie at least since the 2nd episode. She is supposed to be missing her husband, but she is immediately interested in Jamie. Why is she so flirtatious and coy with him?
2. Why does Claire dress better than anyone else? Fur collars? Especially since she is very tall and she is obviously borrowing clothing. Who from?
3. Why is her personality so combative and obnoxious in a strange and frightening place? She is rude and argues with almost everyone. Kind of silly.
I have read the books and I don't remember Claire immediately displaying that rude and combative personality. I don't know if I will continue to watch the show, the actress somewhat ruins it for me. In my opinion, she's not believable.
Reply
Flag
1. Have you SEEN Jamie? Everyone falls in love with him in the books; men, women, children, animals.
2. Maybe they're Ellen's old clothes? She eloped, so I guess she left some stuff?
3. Agreed. A lot of her more abrasive comments are just her thoughts in the book. She gets pissed but doesn't say anything because she's not an idiot.
1
Reply
Flag
1. Haha, yes he's cute, but to me her interactions with him are odd and unrealistic especially considering the time period she is in, of which she is aware. She always has a coy smile on her face and her back and forth interactions with Jamie just don't ring true to me.
2. I don't remember Ellen's character, which probably seems odd considering we are only on the 5th ep.
3. That's exactly it, the book made more sense to me because of course she would be thinking and wondering some of these things to herself, but she actually says them, usually to the men many of whom don't seem particularly friendly to her.
4. I'll add this, after thinking more about it, I think it's the actress. She just isn't capable of pulling off the proper demeanor. For some reason, I find her very annoying. She is trying to become the Claire of the books and she can't do it so her comments and actions are jarring. She seems hateful a good deal of the time. The only exceptions are when she is caring for a patient and some of the time she spends with Jamie.
1
Reply
Flag
Never mind all that, have some heartbreaking Nicola instead...
http://thejaggythistle.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/no-im-fine-ive-just-something-in-my-eye.html?spref=fb
Reply
Flag
Loving the funny reviews!! Eff this effing century ha ha. I am enjoying the series and its production quality. More juice than a medieval pork knuckle. Read most of the books and couldn't get my head out of them. I think they are doing quite well with the plot considering the need to condense for TV.
Reply
Flag
Is it me or sometimes I feel there are scenes missing?
After episode 2 she tells Jaime she is leaving then say goodbyes. Then episode 3 is like they never talk about her staying and the reason she did not left. I assume that some time happened.

The same when she was teasing Jamie, Jaime left the table but never mentioned anything about the tease of the table after...

Its minor stuff But im curious about everything! I love this show, I want more :)
1
Reply
Flag
Yes, I have tried to set up a guy I like with someone else..... more than once!

As I overanalyse everything, I think it's a combination of wanting to spend more time with them (plotting to set them up), a way to get closer to them without being obvious that you like them and risking rejection and testing them to see if they like you as well (rather than the other person). It has worked though and I have ended up with the person eventually so not a bad ploy really!

I loved that she did that. I wasn't sure about the character to start with (I think the voice overs didn't help) but now I really like her as she acts just like I would in those circumstances .... protest, argue, drink and flirt!

1
Reply
Flag
Boreathon, sorry
Reply
Flag
I love this new show! The story is so simple yet so meaningful.
1
Reply
Flag
funniest review ever! ahahahaa
1
Reply
Flag
Two things:

I get that the ballad somehow told her what was happening to her and she got all excited that the second part of it told of how she could go back to normal. Cool, I get why she was excited, She recognized the beginning as her own, and wanted the ending to happen, but did she forget all about the middle? The part where the story said she met new lovers and new friends and spent a time with them etc etc. She will be sorely disappointed and it's her fault rally .

The other thing. I'm sorry but since watching Little Nick I cannot look at another tall bald priest and don't think about Tarantino's character in that movie.
1
Reply
Flag
I think the added story was perhaps a ti-in to what happens in the book? (for those who read the book they will know, for those who haven't; I didn't spoil anything!)
Just Please do not add or derive too much from the book. That priest is an A-hole &( !!!
I also really love the connection that Claire & Jamie have. That part in her chambers where she checks his neck - the look he gives her is awesome haha!
1
Reply
Flag
Picking up pace and liking it. Can't wait to see how she will escape from the castle.
1
Reply
Flag
The first thing I do when I finish reading a book I loved is wish there was more! The possibility of new scenes and stories with these characters is super exciting to me, even if some of the original material has to be altered slightly. That's what makes it fun.

The Mrs. Fitz brouhaha at the beginning of the ep only made me trust the writers more to understand what would really set bookreaders off, and then instantly be like, "jk! It's all good! Just Claire thinking, as she has been known to do!" They know what they're doing, even if it is a bit dubious. (They ran that scene in the trailers and previews for months in advance, laughing amongst themselves as dread swelled in every Outlander fan's heart.)

And the thing about Frank is...all you have to do is read the back of the book and know that you're probably not going to be rooting for Frank all that much. He's a nice guy but...he does research on his honeymoon after like eight years' separation from his wife who has a huge Mount of Venus. But at the same time - everyone would be angry if Claire heartlessly cast Frank aside right away. Cue flashbacks that solidify their relationship but also, smartly, show that Claire is probably too much woman for Frank.

Jamie needs to be more charismatic, and less brooding. Claire is perfect!

Love your recaps, they make me lol at my desk.
More+
1
Reply
Flag
"Outlander broke with the books this week with an entirely original B-plot that ramped up both Claire’s healing skills"

That makes a lot of sense, because this felt like Claire chanelling her inner Gregory House...though I'm not sure he ever cured anybody with Belladonna.

"Claire later tried to passive-aggressively tease Jamie about what she'd seen"

This was fantastic! Even by 1945 standards, Claire's a pretty progressive woman. Hell, by 2014 she's a pretty progressive woman. Her breaking balls on a guy two centuries her junior seems a little unfair...hilarious, but unfair.

"This is how Lauryn Hill felt when she wrote Killing Me Softly"

Maybe that's the joke, but you know she didn't write that, right?

"Have you or someone you’ve known ever set up a guy you sort of liked with someone else? "

No, because that's ridiculous...why would anybody do that?

"Book fans: What did you think of the new storyline? Does it make you more excited for new material going forward, or uneasy about potential inaccuracies in upcoming plot points?"

I never read the books but LOVE that the show is willing to go "off script" for a couple of reasons. First, not everything that in books translates to the screen. So this tells me that they're quite willing to adapt from the source material and that's always a good thing IMO. Second, I enjoy seeing "book purists" lose their sh*t when shows and movies deviate from the original narrative.
More+
3
Reply
Flag
Huge minus for that initial faux scene in which Claire tells Mrs. Fitz that she is from the future and the typically predictable reaction ensues. This is the kind of hack writing that I find truly insufferable, and absolutely too common across the medium (*insert any random dream-esque sequence that serves only to add a dash of cheap drama and bloat the running time for no apparent reason*). Too obvious of a device to pointlessly try to insert into the story so early in its run. I guess I just expected better from the show (please tell me that the books don't slum it with such cheap tricks). That scene had me eye-rolling so much that it partially tainted everything that followed.
And before anyone tells me that it was just meant to illustrate Claire's (reasonable) fears of what could happen if she'd dared to tell the truth to anyone and to show the audience that common superstitious folk of that era would never be able to wrap their heads around such revelation - I don't think it worked. Or that any intelligent viewier had a need for your standard dull red herring.

I liked the teamwork between Jamie and Claire, and Mrs. Fitz standing up to the priest (who I'm sure will be up to no good).
The song at the end was almost too meta... makes one wonder.

Other than that, I find the show's slow, assured pace oddly enjoyable so far. Not sure whether it is my thing yet, but it is interesting enough during a period when not much else seems appealing. I certainly appreciate the beautiful setting.
More+
3
Reply
Flag
"Huge minus for that initial faux scene in which Claire tells Mrs. Fitz that she is from the future and the typically predictable reaction ensues"

Embarrassingly, I completely fell for it...but mostly because I never expected such a cheap tactic to be employed by this show. Certainly not this early on. That's something lesser shows do when approaching sweeps week.

Sadly, I now know it's in their repertoire so I'll be throwing a hairy eyeball at any future, "Wait...whaaat?" scenes.
1
Reply
Flag
First, Lauryn Hill did NOT write " Killing Me Softly"! Roberta Flack did almost 40 years ago, in response to hearing Don McLean sing " American Pie". Second , the tv show does the book justice. Great casting and the script is very close to the book. Considering the enormous amount of storyline to cover, the small adjunct story is sort of part of the book, just a little different. Tell everyone you know to watch so that we get the series picked up for all the books! If you haven't read the books, READ THEM NOW.
Reply
Flag
I feel that wherever the TV Series deviates from the book, it actually improves upon it! The exorcism and Belladonna cure are mush more powerful than what went down in the book, and more clearly establish the enmity between Claire & Father Bain.

Also, in the Pilot 1st Episode, the Blood on the Lintels was much more powerful (& Biblical, shades of Cecil B. DeMille), than the less evocative dried stains on the doorsteps! Also, the way that they had Claire state that she, of all people, should recognize blood when she saw it. In the book, it's like after 5 years as a combat nurse, she's suddenly struck with amnesia, and actually has to ASK Frank what those dried stains are! Really, Diana, where exactly was YOUR editor during this?!

In many ways, I feel that the series is doing a much better job than the original, tightening up scenes, that the authoress left way too loose and rambling!
Reply
Flag
NO, Roberta Flack did NOT write "Killing Me Softly". If you're going to school someone, at least get your own facts straight. The song was composed by Charles Fox with lyrics by Norman Gimbel in collaboration with Lori Lieberman (who was the first to record the song). Robert Flack later recorder the song and it became a great hit -- but she did not write it. While Don McLean did inspire it, it was not the song American Pie that inspired Lieberman.
3
Reply
Flag
Thank God someone corrected her. Reminds me of the time I was in the grocery store and Queen's "Another One Bites the Dust" came over the sound system. "Do you hear that?" the bag boy said to the cashier. "That's the song Heath Ledger wrote for A Knight's Tale. KMN.
1
Reply
Flag
Ok what a great show I just love it and I can't wait until Jamie and Claire get their shit together and have some sweet al so sweet sexy times they have fire together more than the husband god that man is dull. Another great episode can't wait until next week.
Reply
Flag
Yes I'm guilty of trying to fix my crush with someone else why? who knows
Gyllis husband was just right I laughed so much at Claire's expression actualy what really disturbed me was the lap dance... like really? come on guys you have company
I haven't read the books yet so I can only say that I like the whole miracle worker story and I got to get the f*** out of here new conviction of Claire.
Well I guess it makes sense that Claire is in denial of her jealousy cause wouldn't it be weird if she just throw herself to Jaime's strong arms? Ok it makes sense to me cause I'm single and damn that guy is hot, but if you have a hubby back home waiting I guess you would try to not cheat on him... right?
2
Reply
Flag
I didn't mind her doing actual healing--seeing as she hardly ever managed to do anything remotely useful in the first couple of books. But the heavy narration was back, the acting was not so good, we saw a petty instead of cunning Collum, and I didn't need new scenes to prove that Frank is a useless pussy. It is dragging. More Jamie, more humor, and more fighting.

The Mackenizes are supposed to be charming. Jamie is supposed to be charming. I need me some scottish charm.
Reply
Flag
Staff
MORE JAMIE. Exactly...I did like that the new scene provided an interlude for them to spend some extra alone time together amongst some gothic ruins.
1
Reply
Flag
God yes, more Jamie. I know it's Claire's story...but...
1
Reply
Flag
Nope, no matchmaking. I used to grab hold of the great guys, not usually the good ones (the bad boys woot woot). My friends used to make a move on the ones I liked....so I always dumped the girlfriends.
1
Reply
Flag
Staff
DANG! Though it's true, once someone's shown you their true colors, don't forget them.
1
Reply
Flag
Ah science and progress vs people thinking that their are demons and that you can dispel them by tossing water on them and chanting crap at them. It would be nice to think as a world and as a civilization that we have long since left this behind us. Sadly no.

Anyway, it was a good episode. I still don't know if it is for me or not but it is well done.

I know this is based on books and all but she has what 200 years on these people, certainly she could concoct a sedative to give to all of them, poison their water supply etc or really anything gleaned in those two hundred years to one up people that really don't know a lot. It should be fairly easy for her to get back to the stones and attempt to get back to her time.
Reply
Flag
Nominally it's because she doesn't know how to get back to the stones from where she is and fears that she'll be recaptured while wandering around lost.
Reply
Flag
Fantastic review as per usual, Lily.

Yup to the matchmaking.

No problem with Old Gasbag Duncan. I know you mentioned Falstaff, but he seemed Chaucerian to me: a rank village offical whose dignity is undermined by his own ungovernable bowels (seriously, google "Chaucer fart").

I liked the additional competent-woman-as-hand-of-Satan plot, to set up what I think is to come. Also satisfying to see a reversal from Claire's daydream of Mrs. Titspervert's defense and championing of her.
3
Reply
Flag
Staff
I want to know more about this Chaucer fart. I will avoid image search when I google!
One of the difficulties of this series is that it's catering to loyal fans of the book...people who know what's coming. That makes the new storyline so exciting to me- the potential for it to go outside my expectations ramps up the stakes a bit.
1
Reply
Flag
The new "insertions" didn't bother me, it expanded the story a bit, but still cant feel any chemistry b/t Frank/Claire where the budding chemistry b/t Jamie/Claire is delectable. like a fan said last night, so far the biggest fantasy is that Claire even wants to go back to Frank.
3
Reply
Flag
Staff
I thought the new plot line felt remarkably organically grown from the themes of the book. It punched up Claire's medical prowess, which is great. I do think that Frank's relationship to her, tenuous in the book, is almost laughable in the televised version.
Reply
Flag
I think that the "new" storyline is just an adaptation of the changeling storyline...and they didn't want to deal with babies. Although I guess Geillis wasn't involved with the boy...so...I dunno.
Reply
Flag
Fun review as always. Great episode too. But I have to be honest: The misspelling of the character's names was funny the first time, even the second. Now it's getting old (and a bit annoying).

The new storyline was pretty interesting. I've watched a few series based on books I love - Outlander is doing a great job so far of adapting the books to the screen. Not everything translates well, so some inaccuracies are unavoidable, I don't mind as long as it makes actual sense to include new things/exclude things from the books.
3
Reply
Flag
I've read the first four books. No spoiler here !
I like the differences between the show and the books :
First because the books are not without flaws. I'm curious about what the show will do with the parts I didn't like.
Second because I don't want to be bored watching the show, already knowing what will happen.
What I really love in the books is the history parts. I really hope the show keep those parts in.
As for Arthur's fart ? I was a bit bothered but so was Claire so I guess it's all right.
Thanks a lot fir the review, it was really kind of you ;-)
Reply
Flag
I agree that the novel, while an unequivocal page-turner, did have some weaker parts to counterbalance some really incredible moments to come. Like you, I'm curious to see how they'll be adapted.

More importantly, I love it when a book and its adaptation make me reconsider each of them, the highest achievement I suppose. Since watching the show, I've revisited some scenes in the book. I've done the same for the show. They inform one another in really wonderful ways, though I don't always prefer the show's interpretations to how, well, I would have done it, I suppose.
1
Reply
Flag
Three episodes of Outlander. Is it worth watching it? I would have liked an honest and critical answer. Please :)
Reply
Flag
I would say absolutely worth watching. Best show of the summer although that's not really much of a challenge!
Reply
Flag
So I guess you don´t watch Game Of Thrones?
Thanks for the answer though :
Reply
Flag
I love Game of Thrones. That ran from April to the beginning of June. Summer is June, July and August in the northern hemisphere.

Perhaps you should spend your time on summer classes to improve your intelligence rather than watching this show. I fear it's going to be too much a stretch for you.
Reply
Flag
"spend your time on summer classes to improve your intelligence" What do you know about me? What an answer, you MUST be a person without brains I have to say. Your answer it´s insulting! I had been travelling for many months around the world and I had no idea exactly GoT was shown in your part of the world (probably a little planet where brainless people like you live). I Just finished watching GoT few days ago, and I have no idea when other people watch it, though I knew it was around summer in Europe, but not really when. I am sure I am more intelligent than you, I speak more languages than you, I know more of the world than you, and my intellect is higher than yours. I suggest you NEVER write to me again. NEVER write in TV.com again, delete your account from this site. Who wants to know what you think? Who wants to read your opinions? Nobody.
Flag
Staff
I am doing a 4 episode test that will conclude next week with a watch/don't watch diagnosis. I am trying to stay responsive & open until I've seen 4 episodes, hence the four episode test.
1
Reply
Flag
Ok, so I´ll wait for your answer :)
Reply
Flag
This comment has been removed.
Reply
Flag
I've not read the books yet. But I've just booked a trip to Scotland. Incidentally the booking was made the day before I saw the first episode. Now, after this 3rd episode, I fear they are starting a case of the week streak.
Reply
Flag
Is Claire drinking so much to alleviate anxiety? Has she always been a bit of a drinker or is it a health thing? Basically the only fluid that is safe to drink without boiling.
Reply
Flag
While it seems like Claire might always have enjoyed a bit of a good buzz, I think she's particularly taking to drinking as a way of numbing her to her situation. After all, she admitted to craving the oblivion (her word) offered by Colum's wine. That it's more difficult to find safe, non-alcoholic alternatives only encourages her tendencies.
4
Reply
Flag
Plus the alcohol must help when it comes to not giggling girlishly and going bright red when stroking Jamie's chest (I know I would if sober!)
Reply
Flag
That's a double-edged sword, my friend. Egregious flirting is a hazard whether sober or flushed with Rhenish.
1
Reply
Flag
I absolutely love your reviews, you actually had me LOL after this last one. Keep up the great work.

This episode has been my favorite yet, it had a bit of everything and I loved every minute I was watching it. Also Claire is a lush and we love her for that.
3
Reply
Flag
Lauryn Hill did not write killing me softly, is was written by norman gimbel, and it was a hit first by roberta flack, just saying
4
Reply
Flag
Staff
Good to know! Thank you!
4
Reply
Flag
I love that Outlander has developed the interesting tension between what Claire seems to feel and what she thinks she feels. It's one of the show's better uses of the (mostly unnecessary) voice-over. As Lily pointed out so well in her review, Claire got some pretty significant lust happening with Jamie, but I think she sincerely doesn't realize it. And all her little psychological beats about it were really well done.

However, if they're going to include made-up bits with Frank, I really do wish they'd try harder. Claire really does love this man, and he may not be Jamie, but they're good together, so it'd be nice if the flashbacks(?) would include a little more of their heat and a little less of their stressed, wartime agonizing. I mean, Claire and Frank's flirtation about the trolls in the surgery ruins was clever and hot.

Note: I'm fairly confident Claire's Scottish "marriage counselor" was Murtagh, not Angus. Given the relationships between the characters, it would also make more sense. And—though I'm not sure how sincerely you even meant this—Hill most definitely didn't write "Killing Me Softly with His Song," though I believe there's some dispute over who is responsible for the lyrics.
More+
5
Reply
Flag
In the book it was old Alec (aka the stable master and Jamie's boss) who said "He needs a woman not a lassie" part. In tv series it was Murtagh.

I'm sad to say the Wee Clansman, Murtagh (my third favorite charcter in Outlander) is totally different person in tv series :( True Murtagh would never say the above stuff.
Reply
Flag
Yep, I do remember, but I also approve of the switch. Unfortunately, I think Old Alec's not going to make it into the TV show very much, mostly to avoid character-sprawl, and since Murtagh becomes a much more important (and interesting) character, it's more expedient to keep him involved. Gabaldon was able to keep him inconspicuous for the first half of the novel, but I don't think the show can get away with it.

I agree that "true Murtagh" would probably not have said anything, not because he wouldn't think it, since I actually find him to be one of the characters most sensitive to romantic suitability and (of course) most familiar with what Jamie thinks and needs, but because he wouldn't say anything. But since so much of Murtagh's characterization in the novel is dependent on Claire's internal musing about his personality, the show needed to make that more visible. I'm happy with their decision. But I can see your complaint. He's one of my favorites as well, still behind Ned though.
1
Reply
Flag
Gyllis's husband was definitely over the top. But I so far haven't minded what they've added to the storyline.
2
Reply
Flag
Yeah, I always thought Arthur was going to be a difficult role to get right, but this was a bit much. I mostly liked that we very rarely saw Arthur and Geillis together in the book. Even in the prose, they mostly interact off-stage, so to speak, and I always thought that worked really well. I don't think they needed to change that, but I don't know that I care all that much.

Like you, I quite enjoyed the rest of it, included the added stories. Where the novel describes in general what Claire does to earn her place and reputation as a healer, the television show needed to show us, and I thought it did very well. It also helped accelerate the animosity between Claire and Father Baird. (I really like the dark juxtaposition in tone between the show's two figures of the clergy, 20th-century Father Wakefield and 18th-century Father Baird.)
1
Reply
Flag
Aye as in yes is spelled aye, no just i. Assuming that's what you were going for with the "I Ken they're strong... etc", not to mention some much needed punctuation in the captions but I assume that's intentional.
Reply
Flag
Ken isn't the boy's name. "I ken" = "I know"
But.. I ken you know that, aye?
Reply
Flag
Nope. Pretty sure she means the first person singular pronoun. Subject of "ken".

And of course the absence of print conventions in the captions is intentional. Actually, these are more fully written out than most.
3
Reply
Flag
Another cringe worthy review from someone who gives the clear impression that she has no real interest in this show - it's Geillis - not Gyllis!!
2
Reply
Flag
Staff
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qw3Z8Oa7E3Y
1
Reply
Flag
Guys, If you're going to try to phoneticise Scots dialect try to get it right...
"Verra"? No.
Reply
Flag
"Verra" is used in the book which I assume is where the commentator is getting most of the phonetic Scottish dialect from.
5
Reply
Flag
And that usage came from where? I'm Scottish and I don't say verra and I know of no Gaels who do. Outlander and its critiques here are great fun but Scottish usage is MUCH More complicated...
Reply
Flag
Yes it is much more complicated, which is why Lily Sparks isn't writing a post about the in depth study of 18th century Gaelic or English spoken in Scotland, she's writing about a fictional tv show, adapted from a fictional book with an American author who apparently decided that when highlander Scots said very it sounded like verra. She's going by the book- literally- so she can hardly be tied to a stake and burnt if her knowledge of linguistics doesn't extend to the Scottish language.
1
Reply
Flag
Except its the English language utilising a Scottish dialect. My long,over laboured point is that the gag would be funnier if the detail was right, or perhaps the gag isn't aimed at Scottish readers and readers elsewhere don't give a bollocks..
Flag
Interesting open, the entire scene where Claire was 'confessing' to Mrs Fitz I was wincing and wondering how the hell she could expect anyone to believe her story (yes I've read the first book, no spoilers allowed here)
Claire might not believe in demons but she does believe in getting crunk when previous episodes have proven that she gets chatty when the alcohol is poured- and flirty in this episode even as she agonizes over her husband which isn't portrayed well in the show as opposed to the book. In the show at this point there isn't a soul in the castle who isn't aware that they're attracted to each other. I'm surprised Frank hasn't found ye olde fanfiction as he's (likely) researching his past while wondering where the hell his wife's at.
So far the show is keeping loyal to the book which is great for everyone, although there have been a few variations. The final scene saw Claire drinking again, as have most of the scenes. Though I suppose time-travel is as good a reason as any to try and drink the cellars of a Scottish Laird dry.
This is a show that is best watched with some Scottish whisky and shortbread.
More+
2
Reply
Flag
While I suspected that last week's preview was designed to be misleading—aren't they all?—I actually like the way the show pulled off the opening with Mrs. Fitz. Like so much in Outlander, it's not always easy to tell just how much is happening inside Claire's head, and I thought the cold open was an effective way to dramatize Claire's (mostly legitimate) fears of confiding the truth in anyone without resorting to more voice-over monologue, which seems to have dropped off a little though it can still be distracting.
2
Reply
Flag
Follow this Show
Members
4,265