VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 12[3]4 ]


[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 19:30:44 09/20/14 Sat
Author: TracyAnn
Subject: Knowing where it was procured from, I still thought it a bit low cut, but it was gorgeous otherwise. Ned is definitely entertaining.
In reply to: M&M 's message, "The dress was amazing and Ned was cute running off with one of the women." on 19:24:40 09/20/14 Sat


[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]


Replies:

[> [> [> I just read the wedding scene in the book on a car trip today and it said it was very low cut. -- M&M, 19:47:18 09/20/14 Sat


[ Edit | View ]



[> [> [> [> It wasn't even that, it was more that it wasn't flattering to Cait's figure. On the book Claire, it would have likely been more flattering. It was just a bit distracting to me. And the non-linear portrayal took me aback at first, but second viewing it all came together better. Will need to watch a few more times. -- TracyAnn, 20:22:13 09/20/14 Sat

Last edited by author: Sat September 20, 2014 20:24:29   Edited 1 time.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> vanity Fair article I tweeted from Terry said it was the style of the time -- BetsyG, 07:00:05 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> Yes, I know it's the style of the time. It was her lack of bosom that bothered me, I think. As I said, unflattering to her natural figure. It was distracting, just to me, every time she took a breath. Otherwise it was beautiful and to the period. -- TracyAnn, 07:43:06 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> yes, every time she took a breath I thought ouch that dress must really hurt! :-) But, besides being about an inch too low, I did think it was lovely. -- HollyC, 08:39:48 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Exactly! Her other dresses are low as well and not distracting or painful looking. I liked the color. -- TracyAnn, 10:23:31 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Rewatched it last night and the dress was very distracting. I kept expecting her to pop out of it at any second (even tho I know she didn't)/pass out because she couldn't breathe! It was verra distracting! JMHO! -- CarolE, 06:10:07 09/23/14 Tue


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I agree. It was a beautiful dress, but they didn't do a very good job with the bosom part. I know she's not big, and they were trying to create a sexy bosom, but they missed the mark. I read somewhere where someone likened it to a walking mammogram look. -- conmama, 06:59:22 09/23/14 Tue


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> LOL! -- CarolE, 08:19:30 09/24/14 Wed

Last edited by author: Wed September 24, 2014 08:19:48   Edited 1 time.

[ Edit | View ]




[> [> [> I'm still processing, but in general I was disappointed in the episode. I really didn't like having it all in flashbacks. The dress didn't give me a "wow" moment. I think, like for the rest of the episode, there was just too much hype about it beforehand. I mean, it was really nice and all, but I didn't think it was stunning. I'm going to watch the episode a few more times before I comment extensively. -- Shads, 19:51:07 09/20/14 Sat


[ Edit | View ]



[> [> [> [> I missed that both Frank and Jamie married Claire in the same chapel. -- M&M, 20:12:45 09/20/14 Sat


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> Me too. Especially since they showed the flashback. Maybe since one wedding was "civil" and one "church" it was appeasing the adulterer/bigamist naysayers? -- Kel, 20:20:35 09/20/14 Sat


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> I'm a bit disappointed too. Probably because my brain expected things to play out in book sequence. Must watch a few more times to adjust. Looking forward to Ron's podcast. (Those pearls...what?) -- DonnaS, 20:18:42 09/20/14 Sat


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> I wish they had used Ellen's pearls as described in the books. -- Conmama, 03:15:35 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> Pearls really disappointed! too Hollywood and not the right type they reek to me of ability to commercial market the item obviously show up better but are not believable as being available in 1700 s in a cultured strand like they used. I also missed the church scene did not care for the flash back to civil ceremony -- BetsyG, 07:06:59 09/21/14 Sun

Last edited by author: Sun September 21, 2014 16:06:28   Edited 1 time.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> The pearls didn't look at all as I imagine them. Plus.... I know it's Jamie, so not possible to be turned off :) but... but... okay, those are his mother's pearls. His mother, who is dead. And he puts them on Claire, while she's naked, and them mmmphmming ensues. I would be perfectly okay with the mmphmming in nothing but the pearls if Claire had already owned them for a while, if they were already HER pearls - Jamie's wife pearls. I thought it was more classy in the books, where he gave her the pear to wear in church. I must be getting old. :) The line about Claire being as precious as the pearls for him, was very sweet and romantic, though. -- Rita (aka FW), 09:04:06 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> First, welcome back, Rita! We've missed you so much. And I agree with you. I think they missed an oportunity for Jamie to stand up to Dougal who first protested Claire wearing Ellen's pearls. In the book he siad, "and now they're myu wife's" with such conviction. I would have like to have seen Dougal's reaction to that, and it would have moved Jamie's character along more into the competent independent man he would become. -- Valerie L., 09:14:25 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Val!!! :D I agree with you -- surprise! :) Another great opportunity to show Jamie's "steel" and having him facing Dougal man to man. First they had quite a lame answer in RENT, when Claire asked him if he would allow Dougal to keep using him -- "he's my uncle" is NOT in the same league as "for now". Jamie comes accross as being under DOugal's thumb, instead of being an intelligent man, who bides his time and will play his cards when the time is right. And in this episode, apart from not having Jamie standing up to DOugal about the pearls, as you well stated, they also allowed Dougal to speak to Jamie about Claire in the crudest of terms AFTER they were married in a tap room full of men. Book!Dougal would never do that, and not only because it would not have been in character to speak like that of someone who is now his niece, but because he knows Jamie wouldn't have it. And TV!Jamie thanks him, and sits down for a drink and a bit of marital-life advice after that? -- Rita (aka FW), 09:53:10 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Oh Rita, I do remember how well in tune you and I always were. Have to agree with you 100% (again, and happy to do so). Just gobsmacked to have you back with us (and agreeing with me, as usual). *G* -- Valerie L., 13:48:23 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Aye! :) And THAT accursed scene will be coming in 2015. We doormats will have some fun, then! :) -- Rita, 14:48:48 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Oh, my fellow doormat, we have missed you. -- Valerie L., 07:49:14 09/22/14 Mon


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> LOL I think you would have had him tie her up with the pearls in the old days. LOL -- M&M, 14:27:59 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> LOL! Then that would really be "50 Shades of Plaid", as someone wrote. -- Rita, 15:07:32 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> I have to say that of all the changes from the book, the pearls were the most jarring for me—they just didn't match my mind's eye and it really pulled me out of the story. It wasn't the timing. I could accept that Jamie perhaps had waited until they'd forged more of a connection before giving them to her, but they were just not what I'd expected to see when I thought of Ellen's pearls. -- LadyJay, 13:51:54 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> And these were distinctly baroque pearls with gold roundels in between, and pearls dangling from the roundels. It is this distinctive necklace worn by Ellen Fraser in the unidentified portrait in the National Gallery that later helps convince Brianna that Claire is telling the truth. (I read this on another forum, can't claim to have twigged to it on my own.) But, the distinctive style of the necklace is significant down the road. And I agree that Jamie should've given them to Claire just before the wedding, like in the book, for all the reasons stated here. -- Lemora, 16:05:51 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Yes, the fact that they were so unique plays a big part. They weren't just a long string. -- Kel, 18:41:28 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> You know...the Pearl difference is what probably bothers me more than any other deviation. The necklace also makes an appearance when Bree is back at Lallybroch. Doesn't she show them to everyone, and grabs them back when Laoghaire goes for them? I think they goofed up a bit for not having the necklace resemble the books one. -- conmama, 09:39:35 09/22/14 Mon


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> Might sound stupid *g* I dont recall if men wrote that episode, I dont think men have the connection to jewelry like women have....and Jamie couldnt of kept that pearl necklace in his sporran. *g* -- M&M, 18:56:22 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> There is a close up photo of the pearls on Terry's site www.terrydresbach.com. It shows the gold roundels in between the pearls that weren't obvious in the show. She said she didn't want the strand to be as long as it was though. -- Colly, 19:16:23 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> I should of read down here before I posted. :) -- M-another-M, 20:26:28 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Yes! Just peeked and that works for me. If they'd gone with the shorter length that Terry had pushed for, it would have fit just fine with the image in my mind. -- LadyJay, 20:50:11 09/21/14 Sun


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thank you for the link! I'm getting reconciled with the pearls after seeing the photo (beautiful!). But still wish they'd followed her opinion and gone with a smaller necklace. -- Rita, 03:41:46 09/22/14 Mon


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> Me too, I thought the flashbacks were distracting and wish they would have just filmed it as it happened. -- CarolE, 20:31:00 09/20/14 Sat


[ Edit | View ]




[> [> [> And he brought her as his +1 to the wedding!!! -- Kim G, 09:12:28 09/22/14 Mon


[ Edit | View ]








[ Contact Forum Admin ]




Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.