The opening narration is a little odd.
“Strange, the things you remember. Single images and feelings that stay with you down through the years. Like the moment I realized I’d never owned a vase. I’d never lived in any place long enough to justify having such a simple thing. And how at that moment I wanted nothing so much in all the world as to have a vase of my very own.”
Geez, lady. Buy the damned vase already.
When I heard that narration I thought to myself: “I’ll take ‘thoughts no man has ever had’ for $1000, Alex.”
That’s because in the book, she did.
I’m guessing we’re going to see the vase she was staring at again. It will probably show up where and when she is now.
It has potential, but damn, get rid of the voiceovers already. The actors are doing a fine job of conveying what needs to be conveyed, and it is perfectly okay to trust that your audience will be content to fill in gaps as they go.
“Dragonfly in Amber,” the 2nd book, begins in Scotland in 1968, with Claire asking Roger to research what happened to Jamie’s fellow clanmen at Culloden. Yes, most of that book is a flashback of what happened in the interim, but the book begins and ends 20 years after she first disappeared through the stones.
BTW, did anyone else notice that in the newest book, Jamie’s mother, Ellen, had a 4th name added to her tombstone? Caitriona. There are a couple of other names that are winks at the TV series, as well, but I’ve forgotten them.
You’re right, of course. I seem to keep forgetting that the second book is framed by scenes in 1968. I re-read the series last year, and now I remember being surprised to find those modern scenes at the beginning of Dragonfly, where I wasn’t expecting them.
I’m loving this recap. Someone who had never read the books. Deeply funny and insightful.
Everyone hates the excessive voice overs.
Darn! I was hoping it was a series based on the old, underrated Sean Connery scifi film! 
There’s a 2008 viking movie called Outlander, too, which always catches my eye.
Hedda, I liked that recap!
I have not read the books and only had a very vague concept of the story. My wife did not even know the premise. Here are our thoughts:
We figured out pretty early she would be going to the past, especially with Frank constantly talking about the historical aspects of the area. And from his genealogy, we figured we would meet his ancestors. Then, since Frank was quite prominent in the opening, I began to suspect he would portray his ancestor.
Love the music and Bear Mcreary should score everything.
Really liked the witches(druids?) doing their dance. I’m assuming…they had something to do with her going back in time.
I think they did a very good job establishing who Claire is and what her life was like before being sent to the past. I don’t mind that they spent 45 minutes or so in the 1940’s because I figure she will spend most of the show in the 1700’s.
I have zero idea what the “ghost” person Frank saw was and I hope we get some insight on that over the course of the show.
Anyway, we liked the show pretty much. It wasn’t amazing, but solid enough for us to keep watching.
I’d never read the books and only knew what the show was because my wife has watched it earlier. I thought it was good enough to watch the second episode but I don’t know that I’d start recommending it. First episodes are always messy anyway.
The over-saturation of the colors was distracting to me. Especially the first half where I don’t know if we were supposed to focus on the color blue or what but the first 30 minutes felt a study in blue & orange.
You already have. If you re-watch the episode, it should be pretty easy to see that the ghost is Jamie.
Really? Please explain how we know that. What did I miss?
The hair is the main clue. Jamie’s hair is sort of collar-length at this point, and curly-ish. And, well, it’s just Jamie. I didn’t have trouble recognizing him from the back.
You wouldn’t know this at the time you see the ghost. You might, if you pay attention, realize it’s the same actor and assume the same character, but in this pilot, from the brief period of time we see the ghost I wouldn’t expect anyone who’s not familiar with the books to think that.
For that matter, I’m not sure that it’s completely explained in the books (though I haven’t read the last 1-2 of them).
I do not mean to Junior Mod. At all. And OMG I hope we don’t get into a complicated Game Of Thrones spoiler policy situation…but I would like to please keep this thread spoiler free, except for episodes that have been aired or released legally online in the US. Speculation on who the ghost is makes sense at this point, but a positive ID based on reading of the books should be avoided in this thread.
If this is Junior Modding please report this and I’ll take my punishment. 
Diana Gabaldon has verified, outside of the narrative, that the ghost is Jamie. I’m trying really hard not to be spoilery, so I’ll just say that. She had to verify, outside of the narrative, that it was Jamie.
Which, some people could still see as a spoiler. So let me try to express myself in two cogent points:
I will make no further spoilers based on knowledge of the books
My identification of Jamie is NOT based on knowledge of the books
The fact that the ghost was dressed in a kilt, etc. should be a pretty good clue that it was someone she met when she traveled back in time.