Totally agree the end scene was particularly well done! I really liked Isobel much more than I did in the books. That is a good thing. I feel she will be a good mother to Willie as long as she can be.
Great episode. I’m truly enjoying this season much more than lady. The only thing that haven’t done a good job with is growing the relationship between LJG and Jamie. If I hadn’t read the books, I wouldn’t have understood the depth of understanding and intellectual affection between these 2 men. Yes, they "show " us that they have become friendly, but I wouldn’t feel it if I hadn’t known. Great job with Geneva, she did an outstanding job, too.
So I’m guessing next week will build up to and stop just short of the print shop scene?
The one things that bugs me is that they’re not aging Claire, except for a few streaks in her hair. Jaime hasn’t been shown yet 20+ years down the line but his circumstances should age him even more. There’s nothing to be afraid of in making her look how a 50 year old woman would look in 1968! She’s always looked about 30.
Well, even in the book Claire’s own assessment of her age had her still looking quite young. Right before she found Jamie at the print shop, she engaged a young mother in conversation to see how she compared age-wise and she felt she looked younger than an old looking 29 or 30 year old.
According to the events in the book, she should be 48, right? Wasn’t she was 28 when she went back through the stones? Or was that when she arrived in 18th century? I doubt they will make her look 48-50. We are a youth obsessed culture and Catriona is only 39 or 40 IIRC.
Jamie was surprised because people “aged” so much and he thought he was younger than him (who was 23 then).
Yes, I remember her looking younger than a much younger woman when she returns to Scotland. But having central heat, dental care, and nutrition will do a lot for you! I’m sure she had some laugh lines in 1968 but they are just giving us artistic hair streaking. It’s cheap.
The author was rather proud of how she turned the usual romance formulas on their head - having the woman be older and more sexually experienced than the man, and having them still look and feel sexy at very “old” ages for the genre. They shouldn’t sell this idea short.
There’s a lot of aging to come if they stay with this series. I’m OK with how it’s been so far. Interested to see older Jamie though. It’s been more than 10 years already and other than facial hair changes and a ponytail or not, I’m not seeing anything.
He was 21 when he and Claire met right? They spent 3 years together. So he’ll only be, what, 41-44? Sam Heughan is 37. So is Catriona Balfe.
I don’t think they need a ton of aging, they were already playing much younger characters.
I can’t recall Diana writing much about Claire’s aging other than some gray, and Claire’s own self image, stretch marks from birth, stuff we won’t see (unless they give that print shop upstairs scene the time it deserves!)
I think he was 23. (I just re finished book 1)
Jamie was born on May 1, 1721, in “early May” of 1743 he met Claire (who was born October 20, 1918). So he had just turned 22.
Claire showed up in 1743 but it was 1945/6 when she went through.
I always thought the time difference was 200 years but it seems it’s 202-3 years. Weird.
5/1/1721-Jamie’s birthday
10/20/1918-Claire is born;
5/2/1946 (5/2/1743)-Claire goes through the stones; she is 27 years old; Jamie is 22.
4/16/1746 (April 1948)-Claire returns to the future; she is 29 years old; Jamie is 24, almost 25;
11/1/1766 (11/1/1968) Claire returns to Edinburgh after a 20 year separation;
Claire is 50 years old; Jamie is 45 years old;
From Diana Gabaldon’s timeline.
Interesting aside - in the US edition books she goes back in 1945 but in the UK editions it is 1946.
I remember picking up Outlander in a book store back in 1992. It had not come out in paperback and the hardcover seemed such an expense on my new college graduate salary. I bought it anyway and quickly became obsessed and would sneak reading at my desk at work. I though it original and compelling and in 1992 thought touching on the homosexual aspects of these very manly men was cutting edge. I still do. She did such a good job drawing these characters. I, in fact, adored the series and waited impatiently for each new edition. Up until about…The Fiery Cross where things seemed to go off track and the story line just seemed convoluted. But I, of course, have read them all.
I have enjoyed the screen adaption so far. And must admit to having been very excited to see one of my favorite books brought to life. I love Sam Heughan as Jamie, Caitiona Balfe as Claire just is ehhh, IMO. And Tobias Menzies was just plain outstanding. I admit, I am less interested in the story once they reunite. And do not much care for the character line of Brianna, but love Roger.
I think given the tremendous amount of information and nuisance contained in these books, the screenplay has done as good a job as possible to distill it all down into manageable 1 hour episode.
Do I have this right? The re-union episode doesn’t air next week, but it is an “extended” episode?
Ok, I actually shed a few tears watching this. Very well done, IMO.
I don’t think I could leave my daughter under these circumstances. I can’t imagine saying goodbye FOREVER.
I was surprised they showed the scene in the print shop in this episode. I figured it would come in the next one. What a teaser!!!
I’ve read all of the books and watched the previous seasons’ DVDs with Netflix. I don’t have a subscription to Starz, I don’t have cable at all, but do have Amazon Prime. I’m willing to pay something to watch the current season, but I’m not sure how it works. Is Starz like Netflix, so I could watch the whole season if I subscribed? Or have I missed the chance to watch the earlier episodes from this season if I paid now? (Also, from the previews, Brianna should be six inches taller! 
)
If you have Amazon Prime you can pay extra each month and see all of STARZ shows all seasons plus you get to see outlander early! I get to see it at 11pm Sat night instead of Sunday.
I loved the episode. Didn’t love Jaime’s hair but so glad we got the teaser and it didn’t stop at the bell!
I couldn’t understand why Claire didn’t make a plan that’d let Brianna know she arrived safely (print something from that same print shop that’d be a code) and why they didn’t decide to meet at the stones for Midsummer’s or something.
Loved the Batman song when Claire was making her cape.
For the last scene I for sure thought they’d stop as she entered because, cliffhanger.
In the books, she’s 6’0" right?
I saw an interview where she says she is 5’8". I would have guessed 5’6".
Yeah, Bree was to have inherited two main physical traits from her father, his red hair and his height. It will take away one of the classic lines in a later book. It also makes her less imposing to people who first meet her than I remember from the books. I kind of imagined a young Brook Shields type actress (with red hair of course). Perhaps the actress will grow into her role. I haven’t been as convinced of the casting of the characters as I was in the earlier two years, especially year 1.