gclm
Team Stefan
I'm so mad I'm getting old it makes me reckless
Posts: 121
|
Post by gclm on May 17, 2015 14:38:42 GMT -5
I started to watch this show like a week ago and now I can't wait for season finale and season 2 I love it! now I need to find the books because I really wanna know what will happen! xD
|
|
|
Post by napoli on May 18, 2015 10:47:49 GMT -5
Hm, ep 14 was draged on so much and in this ep they rushed through the storyline like crazy. Looks like the worst part will happen in the finale. Wow poor Jamie.... What? There's more torture? I could barely watch this episode and I'm so glad you posted that article as a warning. I figured what that sicko would do but more...
|
|
Kiki
Team Stefan
Posts: 2,953
|
Post by Kiki on May 18, 2015 10:54:53 GMT -5
Hm, ep 14 was draged on so much and in this ep they rushed through the storyline like crazy. Looks like the worst part will happen in the finale. Wow poor Jamie.... What? There's more torture? I could barely watch this episode and I'm so glad you posted that article as a warning. I figured what that sicko would do but more... well that last scene of Black Jack kissing Jamie's back was just the beginning of what's to come. Jamie offered his body in exchange for Claire's freedom and he will keep his word and Black Jack will take what he gets in every possible way. I don't think something like that was ever shown on TV before. I'm not sure if they'll show it in the finale. In the book we got to know what really happened some time later when Jamie recovered and was able to talk about it with Claire. But after watching the promo I think we'll get the whole thing next episode. It should be cruel and worse than the last episode.
|
|
Kiki
Team Stefan
Posts: 2,953
|
Post by Kiki on May 18, 2015 12:38:52 GMT -5
this was just heartbreaking
|
|
|
Post by tvdfansince1991 on May 18, 2015 21:23:28 GMT -5
I have only watched a few pieces if this show, and I refused to read them when I first came across the books because I just can't ship what Claire does on any level. So, how do you guys get around that?
|
|
Kiki
Team Stefan
Posts: 2,953
|
Post by Kiki on May 22, 2015 11:29:40 GMT -5
I have only watched a few pieces if this show, and I refused to read them when I first came across the books because I just can't ship what Claire does on any level. So, how do you guys get around that? well, what do you mean "what Claire does"?? What does she do? She loves Jamie so much that she breaks into a prison to save him with nothing but her bare hands. Well I am in for epic lovestories and this for sure is one that's why I am so much looking forward to the next episode. Nothing to get around for me here on another topic... this article is so good (although I like Game of thrones, too) blogs.indiewire.com/womenandhollywood/sexual-violence-on-outlander-vs-game-of-thrones-20150521
|
|
|
Post by tvdfansince1991 on May 22, 2015 11:44:24 GMT -5
I am talking about already being married to someone else. I can't justify it on any level, magic time travel involved or not.
|
|
Kiki
Team Stefan
Posts: 2,953
|
Post by Kiki on May 22, 2015 12:20:36 GMT -5
I am talking about already being married to someone else. I can't justify it on any level, magic time travel involved or not. As you can see in the show Claire has a hard time justifying this, too. She is still wearing both of her wedding rings and will do so in furture. She loves Frank but she fell in love with someone new. Frank and her saw each other for 5 days in the last 5 years and when the war was over and they could be together again his research of history was more importand to him than his wife. They were already seperated. Unfourtunately she doesn't get the chance to fill out divorce papers. Maybe the books gave me a different view on it than I would have had if I'd only seen the TV show. But I already read all 8 books and I know how Frank is really like so I can easily enjoy Claire with Jamie.
|
|
|
Post by napoli on May 22, 2015 13:51:22 GMT -5
I am talking about already being married to someone else. I can't justify it on any level, magic time travel involved or not. As you can see in the show Claire has a hard time justifying this, too. She is still wearing both of her wedding rings and will do so in furture. She loves Frank but she fell in love with someone new. Frank and her saw each other for 5 days in the last 5 years and when the war was over and they could be together again his research of history was more importand to him than his wife. They were already seperated. Unfourtunately she doesn't get the chance to fill out divorce papers. Maybe the books gave me a different view on it than I would have had if I'd only seen the TV show. But I already read all 8 books and I know how Frank is really like so I can easily enjoy Claire with Jamie. Is it really implied in the books that they are headed for a divorce? The way the show had it, it seemed as though they were on a 'honeymoon' of sorts to get reacquainted when she accidentally travels back in time. I was a little perturbed about the whole marriage thing too. She's technically cheating on her husband with Jamie. Yet, I still enjoy the show with Claire and Jamie together. I do feel bad for Frank because he's missing his wife and doesn't know what's happened to her. The way I get over the fact that she's married is to remember that she did honestly try to get back to Frank but due to the circumstances of where she was and who she was, an Englishwoman in Scotland given the political climate, she couldn't get back to Frank right away. While all this was happening which was all beyond her control she happened to fall in love with Jamie. She didn't mean to fall in love with him just as she didn't mean to be transported back in time. I'm not sure of the time frame exactly but once she fell in love with Jamie she seemed to already be resigned to the fact that she couldn't get back to her own world. At some point Claire had to just accept that she was never getting back to her own time frame and to her husband and she had to make a life for herself in order to survive.
|
|
Kiki
Team Stefan
Posts: 2,953
|
Post by Kiki on May 22, 2015 14:13:59 GMT -5
Well it wasn't implied in the first books so much. I just thought about the facts we got. They got married and soon after the war happened and at one point Claire said that they saw each other 5 days over the last 5 years and the only way they reconnected was via sex but not emotions. They didn't spend much time as a married couple ever... And when they finally got back together Frank prefered to spend so much time searching for his history instead of a real honeymoon. I don't want to spoil it for someone who hasn't read the books but we'll see more of Frank in later seasons and that will give you a different point of view But anyway. What was Claire supposed to do? She tried everything to get back but she couldn't and she was forced to marry Jamie. But even if not forced was she supposed to stay single in a world where women were in danger without a husband? And Jamie loves her and was always honest to her and believed in her he didn't deserve to be betrayed either. By the time she got the chance to go back (or try to go back, who knows if she would end up in her own time or move to another time) she loved both men and she had to decide. Go back to Frank months after she disappeared to work on a marriage that didn't exist for 5 years. Who knows if they would have been able to reconnect. Frank already acepted that she was gone, he left Scotland and went on with his life. Or leave Jamie and put him through the same suffering Frank went through. And she knew that she loves Jamie and that her marriage with him would work. For next season never forget how easily Jamie believed that she came from the future. He trusted her no matter how crazy the idea was because they promised each other honesty. He never questioned what she said. Oh nice interview with Sam btw outlander-online.com/2015/03/27/audio-sam-heughans-interview-with-richard-crouse/
|
|
Kiki
Team Stefan
Posts: 2,953
|
Post by Kiki on May 26, 2015 12:57:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by crimmyj on Jun 1, 2015 10:38:07 GMT -5
Man was that a very hard hour of television to watch. kudos to the actors for their wonderful acting, I feel like they will need therapy after having to shoot those scenes. Even knowing what was going to happen, did not make those scenes any easier to bear.
|
|
Kiki
Team Stefan
Posts: 2,953
|
Post by Kiki on Jun 1, 2015 12:33:23 GMT -5
I'm sad they left out so many of the scenes between claire and jamie in the monastry. The one where he was tremvling and crying from shock and she was holding him... i was disapointed that they left that out.
|
|
|
Post by napoli on Jun 1, 2015 13:15:34 GMT -5
Outlander and the triumph of a true female superhero The incongruities of Outlander have piled up, episode by episode, in the show’s first season. What seems orthodox becomes unorthodox. Now as the season concludes – the final episode airs here Sunday (Showcase, 10 p.m.) and in the United States on Saturday on Starz – the drama’s romantic conventions are being twisted into a startling reversal on the matters of sex, sadism, love and redemption. From the start, Outlander the series and the source material in Diana Gabaldon’s books, has been a tinderbox of non-conformism packed into a seemingly customary package. The package is the damsel-in-distress, woman-in-jeopardy outline. First, we acquiesce to the premise. In 1945, Claire (Caitriona Balfe), a nurse hardened and battered by her experiences during the Second World War, is transported back in time to 1743 where she is drawn to some ancient standing stones in Scotland, all while on her honeymoon. She is, therefore, in jeopardy and terrified. At the conclusion of the first hour, Claire’s voiceover communicates this: “I had been assaulted, kidnapped and nearly raped, and somehow I knew that my journey had only just begun.” The template then, of a woman “assaulted, kidnapped and nearly raped,” is presented, but Gabaldon’s books reclaim this territory of woman in jeopardy for female readers. It is Claire who is in control of her relationships with the men around her and in particular with Jamie (Sam Heughan), the tough but naive young man she is obliged to marry for survival in this world she’s landed in. While the feminist twist is blatant in Outlander – Claire is the teacher, sexually aggressive and sharp-tongued – there’s a hint of the depth of Gabaldon’s theme in the very marriage itself. It’s about survival, as most marriages are, when stripped of romance and social convention. In the final episodes of this season, though, the twisting of the customary has become searing. Much of the story’s dynamism has been anchored in Jamie and Claire’s brutal battle of wits with English Redcoat Captain “Black Jack” Randall, played by Tobias Menzies, who also plays the loving husband, Frank, whom Claire has left behind in 1945. Randall is in fact an ancestor of the good-natured Frank. The underlying suggestion in all of this is very dark – the man Claire married is rooted in an ancestral tradition of barbarity. What woman actually knows all the facets of the man she marries? In the most recent episode and in this weekend’s finale, that dynamic has become deeply disturbing. In the penultimate episode, it became shockingly clear that Randall’s actual target was Jamie. Randall committed an extensive torture and sexual assault on the young man. It was raw, hard to watch, this sadistic perversity, and done with alarming power by the actors. The sexual sadism that is, in the usual narrative, visited upon women was inflicted upon the main male figure. In Sunday’s finale, which I have seen but will not reveal entirely here, the aftermath of the male rape unfolds with a fierce power. What happens to Randall has a casual simplicity but enormous symbolic force. Just as there is that same force when we first see Claire, in trousers, boots and shirt, her arms crossed and determined. What matters, away from the propulsive storyline, is that the victim – Jamie relives his savage rape in his head – is male and the one who both ministers to him and is benumbed and hard-bitten, is female. Everything assumed about power, nurture, violence and succor, is questioned. Balfe as Claire is acutely good, which she has been throughout the series. But Heughan’s work, as the rape victim in physical and psychological agony, is astounding. Both Balfe and Heughan deserve awards galore. We live in an odd time, a time of media frenzy and sizzling pop-culture anticipation about the relaunch of Wonder Woman, that empowered comic-book creation soon to be the heroine of a big-budget Hollywood movie. It’s seen as important and meaningful, this headlining female superhero. But so much about those assumptions of female empowerment being carried forward in a comic-book heroine emanates from an essentially dumbed-down popular culture, an escapism now reduced to the infantile. For complexity, for the challenging of norms and questioning of paternal narratives, we can look to Outlander. This specific instance of a pop culture phenomenon is rare, has a female superhero for the ages and is a combustible, furious love story with the strangest sort of unsettling power. www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/television/john-doyle-outlander-and-the-triumph-of-a-true-female-superhero/article24646989/
|
|
|
Post by jennifer on Jun 1, 2015 13:21:30 GMT -5
I have only watched a few pieces if this show, and I refused to read them when I first came across the books because I just can't ship what Claire does on any level. So, how do you guys get around that? I remember it bothering me when reading the book for the first time, feeling like Claire was giving up on her marriage too easily. The piece that convinced me, and the book explains it better than the show had time to do, was there was no guarantee Claire would end up back in Frank's time period. Also, the time travel is a very physically wrenching experience and Claire explains her fears of dying during the experience. I felt like her choice was not just based on the two men, but it was a very pragmatic choice that reflected her characterization. She comes off even more practical in the books than the show, a result of her nomadic upbringing and personality. The author does a good job of walking the tightrope between 1) Claire/Jamie were meant to be together across time & space, and 2) Claire relies on her brain as much as her heart.
|
|