Outlander (TV Series) The Reckoning (2015) User Reviews

I liked episode 9 but...

[mcampbelljh1 · 8/10 · 7 April 2015]

I might feel differently had I never read the book, but like 90% of the viewing public, I did. I think it's probably challenging living up to the great writing of Diana Gabaldon. I miss some of her great scenes like the ring scene, the Claire's anger over Laohaire scene. Even though, I try to view the show as presented I can't quite get the book out of my mind.

That being said I actually liked most of the episode. I wish they had done a few things differently but most of it was done well. The acting was superb in most of the scenes.

I thought the Jamie Claire anger scene coming back from Ft. Williams was the best scene in the episode. The acting was great by both Sam and Caitriona. It was dramatically written and pretty much followed the anger exchange in the book.

As for Jamie going into get Claire with an empty gun, in the book he shot and killed a man on the way into the Ft. Williams, which was why his gun was empty. He rushed to her when he heard her scream. Why the writers changed that to some stupid line about "Ned telling him not to kill anyone so he left his gun empty" was just bad screen writing. Especially after they put in a scene to blow-up and killed 5 soldiers during the escape. Come on guys at least be consistent to what you wrote! Also the reason Jamie didn't kill Randall was because he heard the soldiers coming and wanted to get Claire out of there quickly; that voice over explanation they gave in the show was unnecessary and a bit lame. The jump into the water was also ridiculous on so many levels, 1st the line "I don't know if there is water down there?" and then they jump (the clothes & arms alone would of drowned them, even if they were stupid enough to jump into a dark abyss not know if it contained water). This segment should be high on the list of how to screw up a good scene with bad writing/directing.

I know some of the scenes were challenging, especially the spanking scene. That was a scene in the book and it had to be in the show even if it offends the modern women. It is what would have happened in 1744. I felt the writers could of included a bit more in the to explain why Jamie had to punish Claire. No it was not because he's a masochistic wife beater! In the book, he sits down and explains to her that if he didn't punish her the men of the clan would and it might be worse than a spanking. Highland justice for putting the men in danger is why he felt he must spank her.

I also did not like the music they played during the spanking scene, nor Jamie smiling as he spanked her (so distracting to what should have been a serious angry exchange). In the book, Jamie lost control got angry punishing her more because she tried to fight back. The dramatic emphasis of this scene did not come across because of that music and smile.

After the spanking, the book had a part where Jamie tries to make up with Claire on his ride back to the Castle by bearing his past, letting her into his inner feelings (something women can't resist). They cut that part out too. They should have left some of that as it was originally written. Especially the knife to Jamie's throat, which took place on the ride back. It is what caused Jamie to make the vow to Claire. The writers should have left that scene on the ride back, not switched the order and make it part of a sex scene in the castle. They diminished the meaning of the vow scene turning into a quasi masochistic sex scene on Claire's part. The sex scene was supposed to be a passionate sex scene because Jamie wanted to "own her body and soul" and Claire too felt this after she accepted his love and the wedding ring (another scene they changed to the detriment of the show). Did the writer not understand love or good passionate sex? or was it just bad directing? I don't know it didn't work except of exploitation and yes, the book was way better.

In the additional scenes added not in the book, I did liked the Jamie Laoghaire scene by the river. Nell Hudson did some fine acting here. I also liked the Dougal/Colum exchange about his Jacobite gold. I did not like the entrance back to the castle. This scene should have been done as it was in the book with Jamie carrying Claire into the Castle, Laohaire and Colum seeing them and everyone wondering why he's carrying her. Instead, they turned this into an unnecessary welcoming extravaganza. Not as dramatic, requires a lot more resources in staging it, and just didn't work as well. In addition, I thought there was way too many scenes with Colum in them; time wasted that could have been used better by including the things cut which would have made this episode better.

The show seems to make the same mistakes repeatedly. Perhaps it's ego wanting to do their own writing or a lack of understanding of the book on the part the production team, if so someone needs to take a look at the effect of that on the show's quality. I know Diana Gabaldon is a consultant on the show. She should be pointing out these discrepancies to them, if not then they need to hire someone who would or they need to listen to her. The episode was good it could of been better.

Good acting bad screen writing/editing- Season 1 - The Reckoning

[mconlinejm · 7/10 · 5 April 2015]

It's great to have Outlander back. I want to start by saying I thought all the actors lived up to my expectations. They all did a great job. I thought Sam and Caitriona did a fantastic job (The anger scene on the ride back from Ft. Williams and the spanking/heated sex scene both scenes were challenging well acted). I also liked Laoghaire's exchange with part with Jamie, by the river. Not in the book but a well written addition and nicely acted by Nell Hudson.

That being said I'm disappointed in this episode. The writing/editing took a really exciting portion of the Outlander book (so well written by Diana Gabaldon) and chopped it up into disjoint segments. Why did they do this? So they could add some poorly written scenes that weren't in the book. Squeeze them into a hour, making sure all the actors got a little piece of the action. In the process they destroyed some of the best parts of the Outlander book and turned this episode into a disjoint sequence of events that lost all its original meaning.

So here's the things I wish they had done better.

The infamous Spanking scene: The spanking scene in the book took place in an Inn on the road after which Claire forgives Jamie during the ride back to the Castle Leoch. They re-wrote this spanking scene to take place in Castle Leoch after they got back. This is bad because they chopped up the order of everything, cut out some the exchanges that made Claire forgiveness of Jamie have meaning, combined it with what should have been one of the best scenes show (the ring scene, which they cut that out completely!)

The book had a long exchange in it about the ride back to Castle Leoch. I understand why they needed to cut most of that out (too much information, too long an exchange, not screen friendly). I don't have a problem with them cutting most of that. However, the exchanges that took place on that ride home is where Jamie and Claire learn to accept each other after the spanking that is why she chose to forgive him. They should have include some parts of that exchange where Jamie tells her about his getting spanked, and especially the part about his father's death. This is why Claire forgave him. His opening up to her showed his vulnerability which is why she tells him she loves him, (women get that, men don't)!

As for Jamie's vow to Claire not to ever punish her again, this scene was brilliantly written by Diana Gabaldon in her book. Claire takes Jamies dagger, threaten Jamie after she forgave him (Surprising him, making him reflect on his values). It was dramatic, it was meaningful, it had context. So what did they do with this exchange, they switched the order of it so it had NO meaning at all. They put the vow scene before she put the knife to his neck scene. They took the knife scene and made it part of the sex scene (by the way that sex scene should have been makeup sex after Claire was jealous about Laoghaire during the Jamie and Claire exchange of the ring, not about the spanking at all. That was the single most important scene in Outlander and it's missing completely!! The ring scene in the book is where Claire finally decides she is in love with Jamie and accepts his love in return) The writers so screwed this by re-writing and combining these two scenes into one it lost all its context and all its meaning and it came across so totally disjoint.

As for the spanking scene itself, the acting was good, most of what they did was OK, however it could have been written/directed better. The scene should have been dramatic, the music playing in the background was terrible it made this scene come across like comedy romp, instead of the dramatic scene it should have been.

I really missed the whole exchange about Jamie buying Claire the wedding ring along with the Claire/Jamie anger exchange from the book over her jealousy of Laoghaire which lead up to their heated sex scene. That ring scene was favorite part of the book and it was gone completely. That scene gave their heated sex scene meaning. They obviously don't understand that romance isn't just the act of sex. It's the lead up to it, it the context of it what made that scene so wonderful in the book. They screwed it totally by adding the stupid part of Angus and Rupert buying the ring back in Episode 7 and with that addition they screwed up this episode as well. They put in the sex and leave out the reason for the wild sex. Just bad writing/editing whatever.

They added meaningless exchanges between Colum and Dougal, Rupert and Angus (presumably to give the actors they hired something to do). They added a full cast scene of the return to Leoch, expensive to produce, out of context and meaningless.

People will watch Outlander hoping for the book version. They are luck so many viewers are tuning in for that and will continue to tune in for what the remember of the great book and for the Jamie/Claire sex I'm sure. (I hope they are paying the main actors a lot of money for carrying this show for without their great performances this show would be nothing.) Their changes and script writing is marginalizing a really well written story and making what should have been the best thing on TV just so so. For the 10% of the audience that is new to Outlander, go get the Audiobooks and see what you are missing..

It's All About Foreplay!!

[brizosdream · 7/10 · 7 April 2015]

I'm glad Outlander is back. I waited far to long to get a glimpse of my favorite characters (Jamie and Claire) and what a glimpse that was. Really great acting on part of Sam Heughan and Caitriona Balfe. For me their story is the reason I tune in.

Diana Gabaldon's book was fantastic. The adaption of it to a TV show is not as good, mostly because of the scenes the production team insist on adding and rewriting. Sorry guys, but I really do not like your changes. With the rare exceptions whenever they stray from the book version, the scenes are not as interesting and in some cases just plain ridiculous, as someone has already mentioned.

History, adventure and sex are part of Diana's books. Her version was exciting, it was real, it was dramatic, it had humor. Where has all of that gone? I know we will hear a lot of excuses why production team did something one way vs how the book did it. They will blame it on time constraints, the fact that it's a visual medium. But no it's not that, it's consistently poor choices made in writing and production. With most of the audience being female, I think they should let the females on the production team take charge. They seem to get it (most of the wedding episode was great).

This episode could of been great too if it had been written by someone who understood that sex is about foreplay, love and passion (even if it's rough sex). You need the link to why sex is there. In the books it was there because after all Claire and Jamie's trials (i.e., The spanking scene, understanding Highland justice, the ride back to the castle where Jamie opens up his vulnerabilities, and Claire's fears that she must not let Jamie fall in love with her), Claire finally realizes that she does actually love Jamie; that she could never live without him. With that realization they consummate there love for each other in wildly passionate sex. It was the most crucial scene in the whole book. It's where Claire knows in her head that she loves Jamie and can never turn back to the life she once had; and the production team cut it out the foreplay completely! It was the dialog, the foreplay of the ring exchange, the anger build up, and the forgiveness made the rough sex meaningful. The writing/production team of this show just does not get it. They altered the "foreplay" until it was incoherent. They gave us "50 shades of Grey" sex when the audience wanted romance and love. They cut out meaningful dialog. They put that knife in Claire's hands at that wrong moment in the sequence of the script. They did it because they are men and apparently don't understand a thing about their audience, about romance, nor about the book this show is based on.

I don't know what to say other than they have a built in audience of millions of women if only they had writers who could write to it. If they did that, they might have a chance of staying on for 8 more seasons. If Ron Moore wants to turn this into some history show without the love story wrapped around it, he's going to bore us to death and eventually loose a lot of his built in audience.

P.S. I did like two new scenes in the show which were the scene with Jamie and Laoghaire by the river. I'm glad Jamie didn't kiss Laoghaire (as Ron said he wanted him to in his weekly pod-cast. Maril was right Ron it would of ruined everything about Jamie's and Claire's relationship and the down the road premise of the story). I also thought Graham did a fine acting job in Dougal's argument with Colum over the gold, but we really didn't need 4 scenes about that while cutting out the most important parts of the Outlander book.

And finally the Scottish scenery is magnificent, so glad at least visually that adds to the show.

Excellent Episode

[albertaabcd · 10/10 · 14 April 2015]

So far, this is my favourite episode. The performances were great. Loved the tension & controversy that was developed in this episode. As a book reader, I was already prepared for a certain scene where Claire must face the consequences of putting the Highlanders in danger. It's still a shock, but I enjoyed the choices made for this adaptation of the book. I appreciated the development of Jamie Fraser's character. It's refreshing to have a change in the point of view from Claire to Jamie. Colum and Dougal's scene was particularly powerful. You see the power of the Laird through Gary Lewis' portrayal of Colum. As always, I love the costumes, the scenery and the set designs. A truly great show!

Outstanding Work - unparalleled

[debkondo · 10/10 · 4 April 2015]

Superb, worth every minute of the 6 months wait. The acting, storyline, Scotland, musical score exceeded any imagined expectations. And of course, Sam and Cait were outstanding, their acting, dialog, so passionate, it tore my guts out. Sam Heughan is so handsome from every camera angle, it takes my breath away to look at him. His acting is so fierce, so passionate, it is palpable. You can reach out and touch it. Catriona Balfe is stunning and equally as fierce confronting Jamie. Mctavish and Lewis, the brothers Mackenzie, another great performance: the acting so much in the EYES, the stares, the glares! The writers have paid a real homage to the brilliant writing of Diana Galbadon, I recommend Outlander to anyone who wants to be transported to another time and be infused with a culture, language, the kilt, the history - a time that is portrayed with such poignancy that makes one want to go through the stones. Yearn for a time of such romance and passion for love and causes.

The First Episode in Jaime and Claire's Story

[jmansmannstjohnslrev · 10/10 · 27 February 2021]

Up to this point in the series, it has been Claire's story. She is the narrator, the story is told, framed and largely seen through her eyes, and her perspective. Up to this point, Jaime has been one of the men in Claire's twisted love triangle, his existence, largely reduced to aiding Claire when she needs him, serving as a foil in her story. It was fitting that in the opening of the second half of the first season, Jaime takes his place as a main character in a joint story, one that will be henceforth shared by Jamie and Claire. He finally gets a voice in the story.

It's a shame that in many of the reviews I've read, so much of the focus is on Jaime's decision to punish Claire for her role in the events of Fort William. This episode is really about Jaime Fraser facing tough choices, competing loyalties and becoming a man. When you think about it, the most forgettable part of the episode is Jaime's rescue of Claire from Fort William, a reminder that this show is not driven by plot, or action, but mainly by its characters and the actors ability to bring them to life.

When you see Jaime and Claire argue regarding the events of Fort William, you see a side of Jaime that you haven't seen before. He's no stranger to punishment, but for the first time, you see Jaime really rattled, broken, similar to how he was after Claire killed the deserter in episode 8 but even more so. He's devastated at Claire's victimization, and Sam's delivery of the lines about his guts being torn out by Claire is so incredibly moving, and shows a growing maturity we didn't see in the first half of the season.

With that base established, the rest of the episode revolves around Jaime's competing loyalties and his efforts to navigate those loyalties. The base of this episode resonates so much because that is the measure of becoming a man, becoming an adult. When he beats Claire, its not just drabble between traditional marriage compared to modern sensibility, but also a battle between Jaime's loyalty to his wife compared to loyalties to his comrades. Outlander always seems to do such a great job of making each side of a conflict have merit to their position. Claire is right that she shouldn't be abused by her husband, especially after her ordeal with Randall, yet you can understand why Jamie punishes her. Her actions put everyone at risk, both in the rescue and by the potential of their uncovering as Jacobites. The same is true as Jaime is pulled into conflict between his warring uncles, Colum who feels rightly betrayed by his brother's antics in raising money behind his back and Dougal, who at least in some manner, feels justified in his actions in supporting a cause on behalf of his Country.

In the end, Jamie establishes himself as a man and as a main character in this story by finding his own way. It's a great contrast to the Jaime we see in Rent, who is largely at the mercy of his uncle Dougal. When forced to choose a side between his uncles, he chooses neither, convincing Colum to give back the gold to ward off a civil war. In his marriage, he breaks away from his father's way of doing things, and makes a momentous decision to pledge his fealty to Claire. It may not seem like much to us watching in the 21st century, but for a 18th century man to pledge obedience to his wife in that way is bold.

This is the first time in the series that Jaime really begins to become a viable partner for Claire, someone who like her, is willing to challenge established orthodoxy and forge his own path in the world. It is fitting in a way that this is the episode in which he rejects Laghorie, as its symbolic of his maturity, his growth as a person. Laghorie has always been someone I viewed as a tragic figure, one who is treated far more harshly for her unrequited love than similar male characters in later seasons (ie. Frank; Lord John Grey). She loves Jamie, but in a naïve, childish sort of way. She's in love with the idea of Jaime, the protection that he could offer her, but not I think, the man himself. His rejecting of her is symbolic of a rejection of his own youth, his own immaturity, his own adolescence. Laghorie simply lacks the maturity to serve as the partner Jamie needs to reach his destiny and progress as a person.

His commitment to Claire and admission that he loves her strangely enough gives Jaime his independence in the Outlander story. He's no longer a supporting character in Claire's saga, he's starting to write his own story.

Love this Episode

[linadigiulio · 10/10 · 3 March 2020]

It starts with Claire and Jamie on bad terms. Claire is upset with Jamie's punishment re the capture from the red coats. Claire put everyone in danger when they had to break into Fort William to rescue her. Such a good ending when they make up. A must see.

1x09 review

[jackDee-56565 · 10/10 · 14 October 2020]

A great return after that cliffhanger, I loved this episode, there was some crazy scenes in this memorable episode

You're Not going to like this...probably

[teek4 · 6/10 · 5 April 2015]

If you've read the books, you'll understand (slightly) what happens in this episode of the TV Show. If you haven't, then you will hate Jamie and his reasoning behind "beating" his new wife Claire for her poor judgment in getting herself caught and in the hands of Black Jack Randall and the need to be rescued. Viewers need to understand that this show has its roots based on historical facts and the Highlands of Scotland and the clansmen of that time had a very different social structure. It appears brutal, sexist and demeaning according to the standards of today and against all that we consider correct, but it was their way and it meant life or death in many cases. Sorry, but read the books first, before you decide its tripe or you won't watch because it offends your sensitivities. It's not about social norms of today, its historical truth.

Jaime is an idiot

[dharmashanti · 1/10 · 5 April 2015]

So the new season begins with Jaime and company storming the castle to save Claire from the evil Briton. Only he doesn't bother to load his pistol ahead of time.

So when he confronts Randall as he's about to rape Claire, all he can do is dialog with him rather than shooting him. When he finally gets the upper hand, he lets Randall live because Jaime is too noble to kill an unconscious man, no matter how evil he is. Because how much trouble could he cause in the future? But Jaime has no problem beating his wife with a belt for her poor judgment skills.

Sorry, but a stupid, wife beater isn't my idea of a protagonist. I don't care how cute he is. I'm done. Not watching anymore of this tripe.

Well that escalated quickly...

[giraffen · 1/10 · 5 April 2015]

----spoiler alert!-----

Well. Well. I don't quite know what to say after watching this episode. I haven't read the books, so I didn't know what was coming, but I really wasn't expecting things to get so out of hand.

I mean, I loved Jamie in the first 8 episodes, because he was so sweet and gentle. Like he would never ever hurt Claire. And then he all of a sudden turn into a sadist wife-beater?! Just... what? Haha, I don't even know whether to laugh or cry. In one second they turned a likable character into someone I hate.

And the worst part is, is that they somehow manage to glorify violent sex. It's like Fifty Shades of Grey. How can any woman find this sexy? It really is beyond me. How can you get turned on by a man who enjoy beating his wife? As a feminist I am horrified by this episode and the positive (!) reaction it has gotten. The message these kinds of shows are sending is that it's OK to beat women, and that women should not only accept it, but also enjoy it. Utter and complete garbage.