MovieChat Forums > Outlander (2014) Discussion > I wasn’t expecting that (spoilers)

I wasn’t expecting that (spoilers)

posted 6 years ago by [deleted]
8 replies | jump to latest

When Roger came back for the priest, and when he threw a barrel at his pyre. I thought the liquid in it was water and that he was trying to extinguish the fire.

It turned out it was something flammable and it made the fire worse.

Did Roger know or was he just surprised as I was? I thought maybe he did know and just wanted to speed up the process so the priest wasn’t in a long agony.

Although he did comment something along the word that he was stupid, maybe he wasn’t expecting a flammable liquid or it was just because he didn’t expect the Indian girl will leave her baby and join the priest in death and he felt he made the situation worse in the end?

It really was a crazy unexpected scene for me, I didn’t read the books so I didn’t know what was coming.

[–] Ziggy (1802) 6 years ago

My impression was that Roger knew there was whisky or alcohol in the barrel (hadn't he and the priest been drinking that in the hut?), and that he threw with the hope that it would end the priest's agony.

I think Roger kept saying "stupid" because he could have run away and been free. By saving the priest, he's still a captive.

This didn't happen the same way in the book. I believe the priest did burn to death, but Roger was in the hut the whole time and didn't play a role in the burning.

Even having read the books, I don't know what to expect half the time. I love it that way!

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

I think you are right, he knew and wanted to end his agony.

It is great that it is unpredictable even for people who did read the books. I agree that it makes it more interesting.

[–] xfool (964) 6 years ago

so was the priest burned for 3 days? what is the book version of that scene?

[–] Ziggy (1802) 6 years ago

I don't remember the book very well. It's been a few years. I believe the priest burned to death ... as fast as the flames could kill him. In the show, there was a fire at his feet, so the idea was that the fire would slowly consume his body. My impression from the book was that it didn't take longer than a few minutes for the fire to kill him.

I'm not saying that isn't torture, because it does sound horrible. But it definitely did not take days.

[–] Ron2011 (908) 6 years ago

When I saw it I felt that Roger knew the cask had something flammable and wanted to end the Priest's suffering. I think it can be argued either way but the Priest wasn't going to survive, so ending his suffering seemed the most logical motive for Roger.

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

Yes, I agree. I think he wanted to end his suffering. I just wasn’t expecting him to be set alight when he initially threw the barrel, I naively thought at first there was water in it. 😂

[–] Ron2011 (908) 6 years ago

When Roger first grabbed the cask, I didn't know what to think. As I think back about it, I also thought there might be water in it. Things happened fast, and as I said, I think Roger knew the priest was finished and he couldn't save him.

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

Roger definately knew it was flammable, if it was water it wouldnt have solved anything.
we didnt though!
the worst thing about the whole scene was the lady joining him.