Outlander Series discussion

Ready -set - discuss episode 10 here! Spoilers up through this episode (10) only please.

man you're on top of it tonight, Diane. :)

Just excited to watch the next episode but don't want to see spoilers in the other thread before I do :)

Thought the beginning was super hot, although my 17 year old daughter is going to be watching it sometime today and she'll have to do it without her father walking in or he'd tell her to turn off that frickin' porn.

I liked that it doesn't exactly follow the books because I'm not sitting there thinking I know exactly what is going to happen next. Especially with the Dougal storyline.

I liked it a lot - but not for the expected reasons - my review http://paullevinson.blogspot.com/2015...

This episode was amazing !
I really like it.
The beginning was hot and the end was cold !

I'm really not sure at all how I feel about the Dougal Colum storyline on the show, lol.

I'm finding that I don't like Colum at all, and I did in the book.

I loved it! I don't think I've ever watched an episode and not come away thing WOW though. The beginning was very hot - not much warning if you were in mixed company :) I like how calculating and conniving they are making Laoghaire. She did not come off that calculating and vindictive in the book. Maybe because we found out much of what she did after the fact not during. i do not remember Dougal's wife dying in the book - am I forgetting or is that new? I may not have caught it because we didn't know about Geillis affair and pregnancy until later. I do remember her killing her husband but not Dougal's wife. Next week is going to be intense!

I've just finished listening to the podcast that Ron does, along with the episode. It adds such a rich layer to the u derstanding why and how. And after re-reading the book, I still have to back and reference the original storyline. Not as comparison, but to see how the writers are using all the rich bits that DG has embroidered with along the way. Colum is so fierce nowadays! But what was good for his gander 0bviously is not good for Dougal's. But goose or gander, the plot thickens rapidly, and I'm finding the new season looming off in the sparkly distance.

Geillis didn't kill Dougals wife in the book. Claire asks her if she did, but she says no. That fate took care of it for her. She did die though, and Dougal did go home for a spell to check on things.

Another great episode. I did think the bit with Geillis rolling around naked was a bit weird & Dougal going nuts over his wifes death a bit over the top but overall I loved it and how about that beginning WOW!! VERY HOT!!! :)

Before I comment on Episode 10, I still can't figure out how to put (new) after my name, but I am (new).

What I love about the tv episodes is that the viewers are treated with respect and with brains. We are not being treated to viewing less than the best of the actors and all involved with each show. I think the adaptations are greatly entertaining but the different nuances that are not in the book, "almost" live up to the details in each book.

In Episode 10 I loved the "drunken tantrum" that Dougal threw over the death of his wife--amazing acting. Then he tells Colum that he does love Geillis and she's carrying his child! And I think Colum's asserting himself as the laird, indeed!, will give them all something to think about. Poor Colum is acting like someone better get hold of this castle and these people!

I didn't much care for all of the claptrap about the Duke of Sandringham but I know it's an important part. Jamie seems to be doing anything and everything to get his name cleared, and I get that. In fact, it seemed to be a different Jamie in this episode; sort of wishy-washy with Leery and going along with the Duke's machinations.

Finally (and I know I've been too wordy), when Sam is being Jamie, he looks like Jamie and not Sam. That's probably just me (he's gorgeous as either one), but I'm not sure I would pick them as the same person if I didn't already know.

Barbara the (new) isnt for new person, it comes up when it is a new post in the thread. So yes to me me you currently have (new) beside your name as it is the newest post in this thread that I havent read. :)

Why thank you so much Ms. Zoey. I have read all of the rules and regs and now I know I am not losing my mind! Seriously, though, thanks for clearing that up!

I loved episode 10. As mentioned before the beginnig was oh so hot, I loved it!!!! They are setting the story up so well. Different from the book for sure, but donig a great job at adapting the book for the screen! For the last 2 weeks now I find myself anxious for the next episode but at the same time sad, knowing that there are only 6 more episodes to go and an even longer outlander drought is coming.

The book and the tv series each give their own special differences to the saga that we love so much! The book is so much more indepth with Clare and Jamie's characters. While the show brings them to life it also expands on other characters, Dougal, Angus, Colum, etc. more than the book does and I love that! The actors are so amazing. Ron Moore and his team did an exceptional job in the casting each of them! I thank God above that he and his wife have brought Diana into the process and have followed the book as closely as they possibly could have.

The only thing I have absolutely missed in the series is durning the wedding night Jamie tells Clare that he knows they both have secrets they will keep from each other, but that he doesn't want them to ever lie to one another. I don't know if they will bring that back into the story at a later date or not, but I for one am missing that.

Sonya wrote: "I loved episode 10.For the last 2 weeks now I find myself anxious for the next episode but at the same time sad, knowing that there are only 6 more episodes to go and an even longer outlander drought is coming.


That is exactly why I was feeling this week. We can never get enough even it is still happening. The anticipation of withdrawl is a sure sign of Outlander addiction :)

The only thing I have absolutely missed in the series is during the wedding night Jamie tells Clare that he knows they both have secrets they will keep from each other, but that he doesn't want them to ever lie to one another. I don't know if they will bring that back into the story at a later date or not, but I for one am missing that.

I am with you 100% Sonya. That is the only error they have made to me is when Jamie pledged honesty to Claire and asked for the same from her. That is there biggest ommission to date. I have been hugely happy with the Starz adaptation.

I really liked Episode 10. The opening passion, the duel, Nell's betrayal of Claire and Jamie's warning, Dougal's meltdown. I do wish they had handled the ritual we see Geillis performing a little differently. The flashbacks to the Druids were effective cinematography but not truly accurate. Geillis practiced black magic. The Druids practiced white magic. Geillis was truly a witch. Her rituals would look more like a modern day Wiccan but again, Wiccan's practice only white magic but they are witches. Most people probably don't know all the nuances of neopaganism but if you do it is a clear mistake! Geillis was by no means a Druid and I'm sure modern day Druids are appalled at the misrepresentation though the Druids in Episode 1 were portrayed pretty well.

I've been thinking that maybe the promises not to lie to each other, were left out so that the tv stories might use "lies" in the story line as the show goes along. For example when Claire was meeting with the Duke, at first I thought Jamie had sent her there to lay a groundwork for him to present the document to the Duke. Then she said that her husband would never know that she had been there. So, lying by just not telling him?

When they were in bed at the beginning of the episode she wanted to tell him about the Duke and Randall, but she didn't want him to ask how she knew anything. Jamie said "I promised I would not ask you anything you did not want to tell me." A variation on a promise?

I was also thinking that that was a variation but I think they could have included the promise or the variation - not just having him mention it. Leaving things out was part of the promise because they "had room for their secrets just not lies" This promise will be so important in an upcoming episode when (view spoiler)[ Claire tell Jamie about the stones and coming from the future through the stones and expects Jamie to believe her story because she would not lie to him. (hide spoiler)]

Barbara wrote: "I've been thinking that maybe the promises not to lie to each other, were left out so that the tv stories might use "lies" in the story line as the show goes along. For example when Claire was mee..."

I don't think that Claire not telling something is the same as lying. Even in the books Jamie always said I know there are thing you may not want to tell me, and that is ok. But when we do tell each other things let it be the truth. So I don't think her not telling him about going to see the Duke is a violation of their agreement not to lie to each other.

I think the show should have put that in, as even down the road in other books that agreement is very important to the story. It's like a lot of things they eliminated one never knows why. Did they just not know all the books or do they just want to do their own version. If it's the later then I think they are making a mistake as so many viewers do know the story lines and miss that aspect of the things cut from the books.

Kathleen wrote: "I really liked Episode 10. The opening passion, the duel, Nell's betrayal of Claire and Jamie's warning, Dougal's meltdown. I do wish they had handled the ritual we see Geillis performing a little..."

I agree, episode 10 was much better written than episode 9 (I think it's a different screenwriter). The new scenes added seem to fit more cohesively into the original story concepts and it was fast moving. Getting into the lives of my favorite characters Jamie and Claire also helped. Not to mention that erotic opening scene. Funny even without taking all their clothes off the scene was seductively filmed.

Ellen wrote: "I've just finished listening to the podcast that Ron does, along with the episode. It adds such a rich layer to the understanding why and how. And after re-reading the book, I still have to back an..."

I totally disagree. I hate those podcastes it's like they are making all sort of excuses for why you should like the things you hate.. I listen to them and they just make me more angry about the stuff they choose to cut out.

Kathleen wrote: "I really liked Episode 10. The opening passion, the duel, Nell's betrayal of Claire and Jamie's warning, Dougal's meltdown. I do wish they had handled the ritual we see Geillis performing a little..."

I am under the impression that this discrepancy was done deliberately. Though "show" Geillis did kill her husband so she could be with Dougal, they are not portraying her as darkly as the book does; not evil and heartless. Also, "book" Geillis was not in love with Dougal, that was not her motivation. I remember Lotte saying that her character was changed the most from the book's portrayal. So, on that line of thinking, it makes since that she would be practicing white magic and not dark. It will be interesting to see how her character plays out in this next episode.

I like the darker Gellis. Remember also in the book she said she sold the I'll wish to leghair and she knew it was for Claire but it was business. Also she said she actually liked Colum and Dougal was just his c*ck and legs (her words not mine).

I'm liking Geillis as she's being portrayed in the show - I thought that she became little more than a caricature as the story continued in the books, and I always wanted her to be more than just totally evil (and finally crazy). I like characters that are a blend of the two to the point where they teeter from bad to being able to evoke our sympathy. A good example of that type of character (for me at least) was Arvin Sloane on Alias.

Barbara wrote: "I'm liking Geillis as she's being portrayed in the show - I thought that she became little more than a caricature as the story continued in the books, and I always wanted her to be more than just t..."

Interesting thoughts:) I like her too in the show. A matter of fact, I can surely find some sympathy for her, where I have absolutely none for Laoghaire in the show. To me, she is pure evil lol- a bit different than how she is portrayed in the book.

Vanessa Eden wrote: "I like the darker Gellis. Remember also in the book she said she sold the I'll wish to leghair and she knew it was for Claire but it was business. Also she said she actually liked Colum and Dougal..."

I like Lotte's portrayal of Gellis in the show. I think for the most part they portrayed Gellis as in the books. (view spoiler)[ It is much later in the series that Gellis turns into the black witch she really is, in Voyager when she kidnaps Ian and the boys. So there is time for them to develop her character as a dark witch. Provided the writers don't mess too much with the story. (hide spoiler)]

I finally watched episode 10 last night. My thoughts during the opening scene - "How the heck do these actors do those sex scenes without being completely embarrassed or laughing their heads off. I give them a lot of credit. I enjoyed the whole episode and I am looking forward to watching episode 11.

Mary wrote: "Vanessa Eden wrote: "I like the darker Gellis. Remember also in the book she said she sold the I'll wish to leghair and she knew it was for Claire but it was business. Also she said she actually ..."

I very much enjoy Gellis in the show.

Sandra J. wrote: "I finally watched episode 10 last night. My thoughts during the opening scene - "How the heck do these actors do those sex scenes without being completely embarrassed or laughing their heads off. I..."

I think European's have a different view of being naked. They are more use it. They have nude beaches, they've had lots of sex in TV for many years. I think they are just more comfortable with their bodies. It probably is not easy to shoot with so many people in the room and cameras up close, which may make it difficult. I always wonder how Sam doesn't have and erection doing it even under those circumstances, as that's pretty much out of a man's control. LOL!

I wondered about why Sam doesn't get an erection, too. He probably does but wears a jock strap or something to keep himself from, 'rising to the occasion.'

Cindi wrote: "I wondered about why Sam doesn't get an erection, too. He probably does but wears a jock strap or something to keep himself from, 'rising to the occasion.'"

Well, since the shots seem to deviate from his nether parts, I guess no one knows whether he's getting a cockstand or not.

But maybe you've not heard of cock sock. They're pretty common in the film industry in nude scenes.

In one interview Sam revealed that he went to the men's room and dropped his sock accidentally into the urinal. He said that there were all sorts of announcements made on set so he could be given a replacement much to his consternation. I'm sure he was the butt of many jokes about that.

Lauren wrote: "Cindi wrote: "I wondered about why Sam doesn't get an erection, too. He probably does but wears a jock strap or something to keep himself from, 'rising to the occasion.'"

Well, since the shots se..."

Yes, the director that filmed the scene of him naked in the stream by the mill said he had insisted on using a cock sock but it came off in the water and Sam was a bit upset by that. She said he is more conservative about that then Tobias was in his nude scenes.

Haha! That scene was delicious. But I'm sure it was kind of uncomfortable...

So I rewatched this last night and I am wondering if I am imagining things looking for other people’s opinions. In the scene where they are on the floor in front of the fire it does sound like she called him Sam instead of Jamie. I rewound. It really sounds like Sam. Anyone else have thoughts on this?

And just to be clear I do not think the are or ever were a couple. I think he would like it if they were. I think she is the one saying no. But that is a whole other issue.