I have mixed feelings about this episode.
The successes came from the brilliant performance of the actors/actress involved in the episode. I thought the acting done by Sam Heughan (Jamie) and Tobias Mendez (Black Jack) was excellent. Both actors grasped the essence of the characters they were playing; making the viewer feel the torture/rape was real. The directing/editing was also well done. I also thought Caitriona Balfe (Claire) acting was convincing in her scene where Claire was trying to get Jamie to come to terms with his torture and rape. Duncan Lacroix (Murtagh) and Finn Den Hertog (Willie) performance were good as well. However, I didn't like the long exchanges Gaelic (without screen translations) nor the comic lines of Rupert and Angus (really unnecessary in this episode, other than to make Rupert/Angus out as fools, which they were not in the book.
I realize that to Ron Moore the rape of Jamie was the part of the story he found most interesting when reading the book. It's the part that shocked him and he wanted to spend time shocking the audience with it. I get it. He wanted to tear that hero character of Jamie Fraser down. That was the important part of the story to him and not the rescue/recovery. The switching of the branding from Black Jack branding Jamie, to Jamie branding himself was indicative of Ron Moore's desire to break down Jamie's image as this brave, moral and invincible man. In the book it was Jamie cutting out the brand as soon as he was able to. There was no cowering, hiding of the branding mark. Our Jamie doesn't cower. He may get angry, he may rage, he might also want to kill himself for his lost honor but cower never! In the book, it was Jamie not wanting to take laudanum for pain while Claire tended his hand, not because he wanted to be a hero, because he didn't want to be knocked out if the British discovered them again. He would fight to the death rather than return to Wentworth. If Jamie did want to die at the abbey later, it was because he thought his hand would be cut off when it got infected. He didn't know if he could live with that after seeing what the loss of Ian's leg cost him in terms of his manhood. Jamie will have after effects from the rape (bad dreams, the knowledge that a dark side resides in all men) but it wasn't about the loss of his manhood. Although he had a sexual response to the attack it was shame at that, rather than the fact that he enjoyed or allowed it to happen. He allowed it because he had given his word not to fight back, and to Jamie or any Scot his word was his honor. Our Jamie is always an honorable man. Ron Moore wanted to make Jamie Fraser less of a hero, less of a man, less honorable and I ask myself why? Was this done for the show or for his own satisfaction. I for one think it's the latter.
I knew the male sadistic rape was a part of this story and accepted that. What made the rape relevant to me was what Diana Gabaldon did with it afterward, much of which was lost in the script adaptation. The entire escape scene where Claire does kill a soldier who stops them, along with her conflicted feeling about killing this person and what impact that may have on the future was cut too. Claire's delving into her religious beliefs, questioning the validity of her killing a man, her decision to remain in the past with Jamie was for the most part downplayed into a rather weak scene with her and Father Anselm. Her revelation that God was with her there in the Abbey was gone. There were scenes in the book that showed Jamie, near to death and Claire actually rescuing him from the brink of it both mentally and physically. They could have done the dream sequence from the book which would have made brilliant TV while showing Jamie's tormented soul. They could have ended the show with the sex scene in the pool. Another magic moment between Claire and Jamie completely eliminated. That scene was so much stronger than the ending scene on the boat they did give us. The reconnecting of Jamie and Claire sexually reinforced the theme of the book where Jamie and Claire are soul mates and would be no matter what happened to them.
To me the biggest failure came in not following the book ending to this whole story. I feel all of the torture/rape scenes should have been included in the Wentworth prisons episode (115) and this episode 116 should have been about the rescue, going to France, the Abbey and Jamie's recovery actually "Ransoming a Man's Soul".
Throughout this TV series, time and again, the writers/editors have added unnecessary weaker scenes like the hanging stuff, or the endless search while cutting out any of the romantic scenes that made me love these books.
I don't care that author told us to forget the book, I can't it's unforgettable. So my final analysis is for the actors/acting I give it a 10, for the script/production decisions I give it a 5.
The successes came from the brilliant performance of the actors/actress involved in the episode. I thought the acting done by Sam Heughan (Jamie) and Tobias Mendez (Black Jack) was excellent. Both actors grasped the essence of the characters they were playing; making the viewer feel the torture/rape was real. The directing/editing was also well done. I also thought Caitriona Balfe (Claire) acting was convincing in her scene where Claire was trying to get Jamie to come to terms with his torture and rape. Duncan Lacroix (Murtagh) and Finn Den Hertog (Willie) performance were good as well. However, I didn't like the long exchanges Gaelic (without screen translations) nor the comic lines of Rupert and Angus (really unnecessary in this episode, other than to make Rupert/Angus out as fools, which they were not in the book.
I realize that to Ron Moore the rape of Jamie was the part of the story he found most interesting when reading the book. It's the part that shocked him and he wanted to spend time shocking the audience with it. I get it. He wanted to tear that hero character of Jamie Fraser down. That was the important part of the story to him and not the rescue/recovery. The switching of the branding from Black Jack branding Jamie, to Jamie branding himself was indicative of Ron Moore's desire to break down Jamie's image as this brave, moral and invincible man. In the book it was Jamie cutting out the brand as soon as he was able to. There was no cowering, hiding of the branding mark. Our Jamie doesn't cower. He may get angry, he may rage, he might also want to kill himself for his lost honor but cower never! In the book, it was Jamie not wanting to take laudanum for pain while Claire tended his hand, not because he wanted to be a hero, because he didn't want to be knocked out if the British discovered them again. He would fight to the death rather than return to Wentworth. If Jamie did want to die at the abbey later, it was because he thought his hand would be cut off when it got infected. He didn't know if he could live with that after seeing what the loss of Ian's leg cost him in terms of his manhood. Jamie will have after effects from the rape (bad dreams, the knowledge that a dark side resides in all men) but it wasn't about the loss of his manhood. Although he had a sexual response to the attack it was shame at that, rather than the fact that he enjoyed or allowed it to happen. He allowed it because he had given his word not to fight back, and to Jamie or any Scot his word was his honor. Our Jamie is always an honorable man. Ron Moore wanted to make Jamie Fraser less of a hero, less of a man, less honorable and I ask myself why? Was this done for the show or for his own satisfaction. I for one think it's the latter.
I knew the male sadistic rape was a part of this story and accepted that. What made the rape relevant to me was what Diana Gabaldon did with it afterward, much of which was lost in the script adaptation. The entire escape scene where Claire does kill a soldier who stops them, along with her conflicted feeling about killing this person and what impact that may have on the future was cut too. Claire's delving into her religious beliefs, questioning the validity of her killing a man, her decision to remain in the past with Jamie was for the most part downplayed into a rather weak scene with her and Father Anselm. Her revelation that God was with her there in the Abbey was gone. There were scenes in the book that showed Jamie, near to death and Claire actually rescuing him from the brink of it both mentally and physically. They could have done the dream sequence from the book which would have made brilliant TV while showing Jamie's tormented soul. They could have ended the show with the sex scene in the pool. Another magic moment between Claire and Jamie completely eliminated. That scene was so much stronger than the ending scene on the boat they did give us. The reconnecting of Jamie and Claire sexually reinforced the theme of the book where Jamie and Claire are soul mates and would be no matter what happened to them.
To me the biggest failure came in not following the book ending to this whole story. I feel all of the torture/rape scenes should have been included in the Wentworth prisons episode (115) and this episode 116 should have been about the rescue, going to France, the Abbey and Jamie's recovery actually "Ransoming a Man's Soul".
Throughout this TV series, time and again, the writers/editors have added unnecessary weaker scenes like the hanging stuff, or the endless search while cutting out any of the romantic scenes that made me love these books.
I don't care that author told us to forget the book, I can't it's unforgettable. So my final analysis is for the actors/acting I give it a 10, for the script/production decisions I give it a 5.