|
Post by dewryce on Sept 25, 2017 0:14:57 GMT
I just reread the book. Yes, he did die at Culloden. I'm not one to like most changes, especially one this big. But, I think I like this one. I can easily see his character fitting in with future happenings. Even replacing a character, Duncan Innes. He was supposed to be a close confidant from the prison but they didn't introduce him. I have to say, I really think they tried to fit too much into one show. For instance, I didn't feel the friendship forming between Jamie and John Grey in the show. Or the closeness between him and the other prisoners and him being a true leader to them. That's important in later books, but wasn't developed. Also didn't like the change to the relationship between Claire and Frank. It wasn't true to the book, or the characters I think.
|
|
Sarah*H
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,983
Jun 25, 2014 20:07:06 GMT
|
Post by Sarah*H on Sept 25, 2017 0:15:17 GMT
Zig, I just came to ask that same question! And yes, your recollection is correct. I am still confused about that scene though. It definitely seemed like it was that character. But why when talking to that character, would Jamie refer to Claire as a lass he knew instead of by her name?
|
|
Sarah*H
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,983
Jun 25, 2014 20:07:06 GMT
|
Post by Sarah*H on Sept 25, 2017 0:16:20 GMT
And Dewryce, I always wished that was how the books had been written.
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Sept 25, 2017 0:28:42 GMT
Zig, I just came to ask that same question! And yes, your recollection is correct. I am still confused about that scene though. It definitely seemed like it was that character. But why when talking to that character, would Jamie refer to Claire as a lass he knew instead of by her name? Towards the end of the show don't they talk about her? IIRC, he rarely says her name, so it was not a small thing that he named her to John Grey. Do do you mean in regards to characters replacing each other or the relationship between Claire and Frank? Rereading the series now (am about 3/4 through the 4th book), I agree with the former. I know it fits the times to lose so many people but I'd really like for Jamie to have that stability and closeness through the years.
|
|
Sarah*H
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,983
Jun 25, 2014 20:07:06 GMT
|
Post by Sarah*H on Sept 25, 2017 0:31:28 GMT
I mean as regards the characters replacing each other.
And yes, I just watched the scene where they speak of her openly. It makes the first exchange even more strange.
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Sept 25, 2017 0:37:47 GMT
I mean as regards the characters replacing each other. And yes, I just watched the scene where they speak of her openly. It makes the first exchange even more strange. The more I think of it, the happier it makes me. Especially considering how much they have to cut due to time constraints of a 13 episode season. Constantly introducing new characters would make the storyline even more difficult to follow. I was watching this morning wondering how confused I would be if I hadn't read the books since sooo much was cut out. I will have to rewatch, I don't remember the first scene you are talking about.
|
|
JustTricia
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,829
Location: Indianapolis
Jul 2, 2014 17:12:39 GMT
|
Post by JustTricia on Sept 25, 2017 0:47:04 GMT
Good, the spoilers knew what I was referring to. I get wanting to change that for future continuity in the series (like a previous poster said not wanting to introduce lots of new characters), but I don't think I like it. As much as I LOVE the character, I think it will be too big of a change.
I'm not sure I like the shortness of the season. It seemed last week they left out the majority of Jamie in the cave (which I thought was a major part of the book) and the fact that the prison took up half of one episode was too short (half because the other half is Claire).
I get the seasons are taxing on the actors, but I think way too much is being cut out.
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Sept 25, 2017 0:58:37 GMT
I agree JustTricia. I don't think it affected the storyline or the feel of the story as much in the first two seasons, but it is getting more and more noticeable this season. And without the character development now, I am imagining how it is going to affect the rest of this season and on.
|
|
|
Post by cindyupnorth on Sept 25, 2017 1:04:26 GMT
They did these very things in GOTs. Kept characters that were killed before, and killed characters that didn't. It worked well there. It doesn't bother me, and I read the books.
|
|
|
Post by Zee on Sept 25, 2017 1:43:53 GMT
They did these very things in GOTs. Kept characters that were killed before, and killed characters that didn't. It worked well there. It doesn't bother me, and I read the books. True, I was particularly happy that GoT kept Ser Davos alive. I didn't mind this change, but I am surprised as this series has seemed to be more faithful to the books than GoT. At least as far as I can remember and keep things straight, anyway!
|
|
|
Post by cindyupnorth on Sept 25, 2017 3:29:41 GMT
True, but maybe they have learned some things from GOTs and what works. Esp with too many characters. Can you imagine if GOTs used all the characters in their books? and all the storylines? it would still be in season 1. haha.
Just finished watching tonights show. Was good.
|
|
finaledition
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,896
Jun 26, 2014 0:30:34 GMT
|
Post by finaledition on Sept 25, 2017 4:09:21 GMT
I'm not surprised at all by the change they made. It definitely seemed like a possibility after the first episode. I don't mind the change. Honestly, they are speeding through the book, but given the constraints of 13 episodes, it's the best we can hope for. If you think about the way the book is laid out, they will be devoting more to the first half than the second (which again I think is fine).
I do wonder if non book readers were confused about the storyline of the Scottish traveler they picked up that Jamie spoke with. That did not seem all that well explained.
ETA I thought the music was really good this episode-added to the tenseness of some of the scenes.
And so long Frank...Tobias Menzie is a fine actor, but I've had enough of time devoted to him.
|
|
finaledition
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,896
Jun 26, 2014 0:30:34 GMT
|
Post by finaledition on Sept 25, 2017 4:24:42 GMT
Sorry to post this here, but Basket1lady look at this tweet this week (oh my!)
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Sept 25, 2017 4:29:42 GMT
I'm not surprised at all by the change they made. It definitely seemed like a possibility after the first episode. I don't mind the change. Honestly, they are speeding through the book, but given the constraints of 13 episodes, it's the best we can hope for. If you think about the way the book is laid out, they will be devoting more to the first half than the second (which again I think is fine). I do wonder if non book readers were confused storyline about the Scottish traveler they picked up that Jamie spoke with. That did not seem all they well explained. And so long Frank...Tobias Menzie is a fine actor, but I've had enough of time devoted to him. There is so much in the 2nd part of the book, I'm trying to imagine how they will break it down! I agree with the storyline confusion, hopefully when they bring it up again they will explain part of what they didn't this time as those details are needed. See, I was disappointed at the change in storyline for Frank. I think Tobias is wonderful and he seemed wasted this episode.
|
|
sheri
Shy Member
Posts: 30
Mar 2, 2017 0:01:52 GMT
|
Post by sheri on Sept 25, 2017 5:10:03 GMT
I just watched episode 3. I loved it. I was so surprised and happy to see Murtagh! I always wondered go the story would turn out if he survived Culloden. It just makes me wonder how It will effect Jamie's relationship with young Ian.
|
|
|
Post by jlynnbarth on Sept 25, 2017 6:23:26 GMT
I'm happy they kept Murtaugh. I loved the character in the book and was sad when he died. I'm glad they chose to keep him on the show.
Unfortunately I'm not sad to see Frank go. Now I feel like we can finally move on. I felt that way in the book too. I wanted Claire and Jamie back together.
I didn't like how they changed Claire and Franks storyline at all. They should have kept it discrete in my opinion. I feel like they took the easy route with that storyline. It was so much more complex than how they portrayed it. The time constraints for fitting it all in really stink.
I thought Caitriona's (Claire's) facial expression when Joe told her about Frank was perfect. The initial look of "I'm free to love Jamie," to the shock of losing Frank, all within milliseconds was great!
|
|
stittsygirl
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,580
Location: In the leaves and rain.
Jun 25, 2014 19:57:33 GMT
|
Post by stittsygirl on Sept 25, 2017 7:01:46 GMT
Great episode, loved it! I know they have to hurry things along but I think they are doing it well, for all the story they have to tell. And I liked Lord John!!! I'll forgive casting that he isn't blond because I think the actor will do very well in the part . He, as a character, is eventually so interwoven into the lives of all the Frasers that it was important they cast him well. I still think the only real miss they've had in the casting so far is Brianna, but I'm hoping I'll like the actress better this season. I'm also very happy they kept Murtagh. He's a character we already know and love and I think it will good keeping him around, even if it deviates from the book. I also agree that it was time to let Frank go, even as much as I liked Tobias Menzies in the part. I'm assuming we're not going to see him on GOT anymore either, so I hope he has some other good projects lined up for the future. ETA: Diana Gabaldon's individual books get longer and longer as the series progresses, so unless they add a few more episodes per season (assuming they go past season four) they're going to have to trim the story and the introduction of new characters more and more.
|
|
JustTricia
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,829
Location: Indianapolis
Jul 2, 2014 17:12:39 GMT
|
Post by JustTricia on Sept 25, 2017 10:26:55 GMT
I just watched episode 3. I loved it. I was so surprised and happy to see Murtagh! I always wondered go the story would turn out if he survived Culloden. It just makes me wonder how It will effect Jamie's relationship with young Ian. I think that's my concern. Jamie becomes so much closer to Ian and Fergus from here out. If he already has Murtagh, will that change it? I'm almost finished with book four, but how will that change the time spent with Jocasta? Fraser's Ridge? Pretty much everything in that book? I don't see how he'll fit in. He's sent to the Colonies in this episode; now they'll have to find him. What will be left out for that to take place? They already leave so much out to pack things in.
|
|
Sarah*H
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,983
Jun 25, 2014 20:07:06 GMT
|
Post by Sarah*H on Sept 25, 2017 10:42:48 GMT
As DeWryce suggested, I think he'll take the place of Duncan who played a similar role in Jamie's life in NC. Although I read an article last night that suggested fans who have read Book 4 might have some idea of how Murtagh will return to the story so maybe not.
|
|
|
Post by cindyupnorth on Sept 25, 2017 14:26:49 GMT
|
|
stittsygirl
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,580
Location: In the leaves and rain.
Jun 25, 2014 19:57:33 GMT
|
Post by stittsygirl on Sept 25, 2017 15:03:42 GMT
I'm still not seeing it, but I guess we'll have to see his hair down then. I'd like to see a messy Lord John . I'm very excited for the next few episodes .
|
|
oh yvonne
Prolific Pea
Posts: 8,009
Jun 26, 2014 0:45:23 GMT
|
Post by oh yvonne on Sept 25, 2017 17:23:37 GMT
Okay, I watched last night and as someone who has not read the books, I'm following along with the story just fine. It makes total sense to me and this thread has me SOOO confused, lol. I don't really want to know I guess now, what is changed, and these posts are so cryptic, maybe its best I don't know and just enjoy the ride. No idea what's to come, who is missing, or what. And for once I'm sort of glad I didn't read the book first, cause I'm loving this just as it is.
|
|
|
Post by Basket1lady on Sept 25, 2017 18:00:50 GMT
Sorry to post this here, but Basket1lady look at this tweet this week (oh my!) Oooooo. Throwing some shade! Maybe Alstair isn't our surrogate Jamie after all?
|
|
|
Post by Basket1lady on Sept 25, 2017 18:30:30 GMT
I knew that was Murtagh! DH had his lamp on next to his chair and it was reflecting in the TV. He said, no it isn't. But I knew it was! For some reason, I suspected that they might keep him around. Even reading the books, I felt like Murtagh should be there on Fraser's Ridge. Ok, I love this show. Book, no book, following the book, keeping favorite characters alive... Love that! I can't say that I like how mean they showed Frank at the end. I felt like they were intimating that BJR was there in Frank 200 years later. Frank wasn't mean--he was Alex's son, not BJR. The whole point was that Claire was choosing between two good men and Jamie just won out because he's, well--so JAMIE. As for covering too much in this episode, what choice did they really have? There is a TON to cover in Voyager. Maybe even more than in the bigger books (although this one is none too small, either!) Before watching the show, DH and I were trying to lay out what the next few shows would have to cover. We know the print shop is episode 6, so we were working back from there. I predicted that Helwater wouldn't be until the end of episode 4. I wonder if they are really going to play up Helwater and Geneva and the point that Jamie will father William. It's a big point in the books--but not until what, book 5? The writers aren't messing around--they are working several seasons down the road!
|
|
|
Post by Basket1lady on Sept 25, 2017 18:41:03 GMT
I just watched episode 3. I loved it. I was so surprised and happy to see Murtagh! I always wondered go the story would turn out if he survived Culloden. It just makes me wonder how It will effect Jamie's relationship with young Ian. I think that's my concern. Jamie becomes so much closer to Ian and Fergus from here out. If he already has Murtagh, will that change it? I'm almost finished with book four, but how will that change the time spent with Jocasta? Fraser's Ridge? Pretty much everything in that book? I don't see how he'll fit in. He's sent to the Colonies in this episode; now they'll have to find him. What will be left out for that to take place? They already leave so much out to pack things in. Well, chances are that we won't see Murtagh again until Season 4. Jamie has a lot of ground to cover before Fraser's Ridge! As for Ian, a lot of that happens before my estimated reunion (and I'm thinking you mean Young Ian here.) As for meeting Jocasta, I predict Murtagh will be at River Run when Jamie and Claire arrive. The area (not specificially the estate) was known (even in real life), as a gathering area for Scots. Both those who fled Scotland after Culloden and those who were indentured.
|
|
|
Post by Anna*Banana on Sept 25, 2017 19:28:03 GMT
I just reread the book. Yes, he did die at Culloden. I'm not one to like most changes, especially one this big. But, I think I like this one. I can easily see his character fitting in with future happenings. Even replacing a character, Duncan Innes. He was supposed to be a close confidant from the prison but they didn't introduce him. I have to say, I really think they tried to fit too much into one show. For instance, I didn't feel the friendship forming between Jamie and John Grey in the show. Or the closeness between him and the other prisoners and him being a true leader to them. That's important in later books, but wasn't developed. Also didn't like the change to the relationship between Claire and Frank. It wasn't true to the book, or the characters I think. It's unfortunate that they have to find a way to tie up some story lines so they can fit it all in, in one season. It wasn't as detailed as the book or as well scripted as it was written in the book. But I'm ok with it... I'm hoping as the seasons progress they'll be able to flesh it out better. The Claire and Frank thing, that made me a bit sad. It changed the complexion of her in a way I was uncomfortable with.
|
|
JustTricia
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,829
Location: Indianapolis
Jul 2, 2014 17:12:39 GMT
|
Post by JustTricia on Sept 25, 2017 21:39:38 GMT
So maybe I'm remembering the books differently, but I wasn't really bothered by how Frank came across in this episode. Isn't it said in the book that Frank had multiple affairs, and that Claire knew about them? Am I remembering that wrong? To me, the only difference was the woman actually showing up at the house.
eta ~ Which, seriously, she was picking Frank up because Claire was taking the car. In an earlier episode we see Claire park on the street in front of the house. There were several people at the party who were going to dinner and had to have had cars. The woman didn't notice Frank's car out front or all the additional cars? He said she was picking him up because Claire was taking the car; to me that says he's picked her up before so she would know the car.
|
|
stittsygirl
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,580
Location: In the leaves and rain.
Jun 25, 2014 19:57:33 GMT
|
Post by stittsygirl on Sept 25, 2017 21:39:41 GMT
Well, chances are that we won't see Murtagh again until Season 4. Jamie has a lot of ground to cover before Fraser's Ridge! As for Ian, a lot of that happens before my estimated reunion (and I'm thinking you mean Young Ian here.) As for meeting Jocasta, I predict Murtagh will be at River Run when Jamie and Claire arrive. The area (not specificially the estate) was known (even in real life), as a gathering area for Scots. Both those who fled Scotland after Culloden and those who were indentured. This is what I'm thinking will happen as well. I'm sure it will be a while before we see him again.
|
|
QueenoftheSloths
Drama Llama
Member Since January 2004, 2,698 forum posts PeaNut Number: 122614 PeaBoard Title: StuckOnPeas
Posts: 5,955
Jun 26, 2014 0:29:24 GMT
|
Post by QueenoftheSloths on Sept 25, 2017 22:20:08 GMT
The whole thing with Frank just makes me sad. Apparently they agreed to not divorce but they could see other people? So he was doing something she agreed to, which kind of makes her look like a real shrew for screaming at him and carrying on. It makes me sad that they DIDN'T divorce. Frank spent 20 years married to a woman who didn't love him and constantly thought about her other husband during sex. Kind of a raw deal for him. Then when they finally decide to divorce, he dies the same day. As they say, life sucks and then you die.
As a non book reader, I was confused by the old man and the prophesy, and about where Lord John was taking Jamie at the end. We always rewatch the episode later in the week, so maybe that will help clarify things.
|
|
JustTricia
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,829
Location: Indianapolis
Jul 2, 2014 17:12:39 GMT
|
Post by JustTricia on Sept 25, 2017 23:22:16 GMT
The whole thing with Frank just makes me sad. Apparently they agreed to not divorce but they could see other people? So he was doing something she agreed to, which kind of makes her look like a real shrew for screaming at him and carrying on. It makes me sad that they DIDN'T divorce. Frank spent 20 years married to a woman who didn't love him and constantly thought about her other husband during sex. Kind of a raw deal for him. Then when they finally decide to divorce, he dies the same day. As they say, life sucks and then you die. As a non book reader, I was confused by the old man and the prophesy, and about where Lord John was taking Jamie at the end. We always rewatch the episode later in the week, so maybe that will help clarify things. I believe Claire asked him to be discreet about it and then she shows up at the house. You'll see more of the old man's story about the gold and where Lord John took Jamie later. But I agree, those parts were kind of dropped in with no explanation.
|
|