Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hmmm. We'll have to disagree on this one. I wasn't as ... captivated. I will admit though, I'm watching it for the 5th time right now, LOL.
It was Colum and Dougal's episode
He looks like the Cowardly Lion from the Wizard of Oz
Claire is still in her 1945 brain - she hasn't adapted to the 18th century yet. I'm talking at the TV, just like I talked at the book. "Don't!, don't!"
Lots of differences from the book last night ... and I wish Leghair* had got slapped twice with no apology!
*Yes, I know that's not how to spell her name, LOL
So you watched it five times but weren't as captivated? Maybe you started to nitpick on different details because you watched so many times. That's why I stopped doing that. I got really tired of the books and all the flaws seemed so glaring after re-reading it a few times.
Then again, maybe you just didn't like the changes. I really enjoyed them with a couple of exceptions. I didn't understand Claire showing up and blackmailing Sandringham. That was really odd, and dangerous. Who knows how a powerful duke is going to react? And it seems so unnecessary to do that before Jamie even had a chance to talk to him. It was just out there with no real explanation, but maybe it will come up later.
The other thing I thought was weird was them making it seem like Claire went to Geillis just to warn her to leave. Why would she do that for a murderer? It just makes more sense to make it about Claire going to help a sick woman, which is totally in character for her. I'm not sure I like the fact that we all already know about the murders, affair, and pregnancy before Claire goes to warn her of anything. I liked it better in the book where she found out what a scary person Geillis is in the thieve's hole. I guess they wanted to do that dance in the woods to connect Geillis to the druid rituals that Mrs. Graham and her ladies did back in 1945. At least it gave them a chance to play that beautifully haunting song again.
So you watched it five times but weren't as captivated? Maybe you started to nitpick on different details because you watched so many times. That's why I stopped doing that. I got really tired of the books and all the flaws seemed so glaring after re-reading it a few times.
Then again, maybe you just didn't like the changes. I really enjoyed them with a couple of exceptions. I didn't understand Claire showing up and blackmailing Sandringham. That was really odd, and dangerous. Who knows how a powerful duke is going to react? And it seems so unnecessary to do that before Jamie even had a chance to talk to him. It was just out there with no real explanation, but maybe it will come up later.
The other thing I thought was weird was them making it seem like Claire went to Geillis just to warn her to leave. Why would she do that for a murderer? It just makes more sense to make it about Claire going to help a sick woman, which is totally in character for her. I'm not sure I like the fact that we all already know about the murders, affair, and pregnancy before Claire goes to warn her of anything. I liked it better in the book where she found out what a scary person Geillis is in the thieve's hole. I guess they wanted to do that dance in the woods to connect Geillis to the druid rituals that Mrs. Graham and her ladies did back in 1945. At least it gave them a chance to play that beautifully haunting song again.
LOL - I lost count how many times I watched other episodes, especially The Wedding and The Reckoning.
I am completely addicted. I hope they have Sam Heughan do another voice-over. Hearing things from Jamie's side is one of the changes I really like.
I think the reasoning of showing Claire going to Geillis was ... Geillis is basically the closest (or only) friend she has, murder or not.
The Wentworth episode will be seen through my fingers the first or second time, just like the lashing scenes in The Garrison Commander.
It's been a while since I re-read Outlander, so sometimes I just sit up and say, "Oh yeah, I remember what's coming up!" The changes haven't bothered me - I figure Ron Moore has a reason for them down the road. Adaptation is the key
Those photos are really pretentious. Heughan seems like a nice enough person; and I love it that both he and his brother were named for LOTR characters.
I very much enjoyed the first Outlander novel; the sequels, not as much. I am hoping the TV version of the sequels will be more entertaining than the books. I think Catriona Balfe makes an outstanding Claire; and Sam Heughan is nearly as good as Jamie. Tobias Menzies is acting the double role of Frank/Black Jack Randall with gusto, probably is flat-out thrilled not to be playing wimpy Edmure Tully in Game of Thrones anymore....So far, I am loving the series, and wonder how they will handle what's going to happen.
Yes, I like how he even LOOKS like a different person with only the hair (that I can see) as actual modiication. It's just everything about the way he carries himself and speaks and so forth. I bet that is a LOT of fun.
Sometimes it's hard for me to see Frank as a good person after watching Black-Jack. So evil and cruel.
I wonder if I've ruined the books (at least the first one) by watching the show first...........usually it works better doing the other way around.
Don't worry about it. Just get the first book and start reading. Diana Gabaldon likes to engage the reader's senses, which she does with scads of detail, and she is the first author who can make me actually smell things when she writes about scents. Her background research is impeccable, and her characterization of the historical characters she uses is believable, even if you know that it is fictional. It will be interesting to see how the film version portrays Bonnie Prince Charlie, for example. You could start reading and catch up to current events fairly quickly. There will be much more in the books than on the screen, and I think you will find the book and the film versions both satisfying. The books are long, 800 to 900 hardcover pages. For those who do not like Big Books, the detail is too much. I personally really, really like Big Books! I hate it when I get to the point when I know I am past the halfway mark in one and there are fewer pages left to read than I have already finished!
Quote:
Originally Posted by jencam
Yes, I like how he even LOOKS like a different person with only the hair (that I can see) as actual modiication. It's just everything about the way he carries himself and speaks and so forth. I bet that is a LOT of fun.
Sometimes it's hard for me to see Frank as a good person after watching Black-Jack. So evil and cruel.
Some minor spoilers in the link, but Diana tells a lot about how the book series came to be. read the link if you do not mind the spoilers.
"There’s a local group of fans here in Phoenix who have been taking me out to tea every spring for the last few years. There’s a resort that does a full formal English tea, with scones and clotted cream and finger sandwiches and all kinds of goodies–we all have a good time and they get to pick my brains about the book in progress.
Anyway, at one of these teas, the readers got onto Jack Randall, and what a horrible, terrible, nasty, loathsome, repellent….etc. he was. And all the time, I was sitting there, quietly sipping my tea, and thinking, 'You really don’t have any notion that you’re talking to Black Jack Randall, do you?' Just bear that in mind."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.