Under The Dome (tv series)

They talked about digging a hole last night. They said it was too deep. They also said the mechanical backhoe would be destroyed if it touched the dome.

 

My wife and I were on the edge of our seats and poof, episode two is over in 45 minutes. Can't wait to see Ep 3. The house couldn't seem to make up its mind as to whether it was really on fire or not. The vet definitely killed tge doctor in self defense.

 

Btw the deputy who lost his mind went nutso after what seemed a day? I could see being a little paranoid if it was a big city but Chester Mills?

 

After a promising first episode, I thought most of last night's episode was horrible. That deputy going crazy for no apparent reason was one of them.

 

We've taped the first 2 episodes, is it worth watching?? I haven't read this thread to avoid spoilers.

 

"B-A-BAY..."

 

If it were an alien object, then it wouldn't have to obey our laws of physics. If sound can't get through, and water barely seeps through a few drops ("like a sieve"), then it would follow that air barely gets through a little tiny bit, but not enough to help much. Think of the dome as a big Tupperware container, only bullet-proof (which we haven't seen yet).

What if a much worse fire started? They already established that all the fire trucks and most of the cops are gone. And they've established there are dozens (maybe hundreds) of containers of propane somewhere else in town. If a huge fire started, what would happen to the air?

Just sayin'...

 

Umm, when they were throwing buckets of water on the house, why were they throwing it on the non-burning part, don't you usually put the water on the flames to put out a fire (and it wasn't so that part of the house didn't burn because both windows had flames coming out of them). Also, "hey that car caught on fire" pan to to car with the window broken out and looks like it was on fire yesterday.

I'm not sure I'm going to keep going past episode three. As Vidiot says, Barbie's a good guy in the book, somebody you can root for. One other big change I didn't like is in the book they can communicate with the outside via cell phone and this allowed for more discussion about the dome, so when a character states you can't dig under the dome you know where they got that information. It does seem like the upped the human drama.

 

Yeah but King thought the remake of The Shining and even Maximum Overdrive were great. Shows what he knows.

 

the kid that has the girl locked in the bomb shelter has GOT to go. it's like having a little kid in the show, drop that story line ASAP, it is just plain stupid.

 

Is it NOT POSSIBLE for you to avoid giving out spoilers when you're asked not to?

Jeezus, you're ruining this show for me.

 

The remedies to your complaints are so simple that one can only guess why you haven't made use of them. As has been previously suggested, in a spirit of good humor, you can either:

Stop reading this thread, or
Start a new thread and title it "Under the Dome - No Spoilers"

I'm pretty sure either choice would solve your problem.

There is clearly some interest in a rare opportunity to compare and contrast the development of a major television product with its source material and that is the direction this thread has taken... Doesn't mean there can't be a separate discussion devoted solely to the TV show. Our host seems to have enough bandwidth for all.

 

No spoilers -- I think those clues are very vague, and they're all telegraphed in the very first episode. If the dome was only a thin bubble that stopped at the ground, everybody could dig their way out and they'd have no shows after episode #3.

Again: the show is not about the Dome. It's about the people going nuts in town. The dome is not even 5% of the story. I have to confess, I enjoy the performances by the actors, and while I'm not happy with the story changes, there's not a lousy actor in the bunch. In particular, Dean Norris as the villain ("Big Jim") is doing a tremendous job, showing how he's a cheat, a liar, a wealthy criminal, and also capable of kindness, loyalty, and even heroism on occasion. I enjoy seeing characters this complicated who have so many shades of grey.

 

I'd like to discuss what I've seen, without knowing what's coming. And this is entirely the appropriate place to take about what happens on the show each week. This thread is even TITLED "Under the Dome (tv series)", so if anything, another thread should be created to compare/contrast the tv show with the book, and those interested in chatting about the book would be welcome there.

Most threads that discuss tv shows (like this one) have participants that are good about not sharing spoilers, like the Game of Thrones thread.

 

Fire always looks so fake in just about every tv show. And while I can understand not wanting to burn an actual house down, I wish they would use real fire for small things, like when it starts in the trashcan. It seems like even the smallest of fires (I'm talking about more than just this show) these days - candles, lighters, etc always look so incredibly fake on TV.

I started this thread specifically for the TV show. To tell someone here to go elsewhere to avoid spoilers is pretty rich. This is a new, current show! Not some series from years past. There are threads here devoted to King's novels and they would be a more appropriate place to discuss the future events that readers already know or suspect are going to happen.

 

Wish I was rich.

 

I didn't mind the deputy going crazy. Who knows how unhinged he was to begin with?

But I thought the dialog and pacing in this episode was way weaker than episode 1.

I'm still watching, but it treaded closer to Revolution this week. Fortunately, no terrible actors on the scale of Charlie from Revolution.

Is the bad priest in the book? It seems he's much more evil than Big Jim.

 

My comment wasn't addressed to you. It was addressed to a guy who claims to want to discuss the TV series who has made exactly one comment about the show and four bitchy comments about the direction of the thread.

You may have started the thread with one intention, but discussions have a way of taking their own direction. You could have asked the moderators to change the title to add a no- spoiler tag or you could have started another thread clearly labelled no spoilers once you saw the way comments were going. This is a unique situation, where a novel is being adapted to a mini series and both the author of the novel and the producers of the miniseries have said that there will be major changes from the source material, including an entirely different ending. Inevitably, as with both the Game of Thrones series (that's staying very close to the source) and the Reacher movie (that cast a very small person in a large person's role) there will be conflicts between people who read and watch and people who only watch.

Solutions are easy. Ask to have the thread re-titled; start a new, more precisely labelled thread; and/or stop reading the thread that's causing the emotional upheaval. But the member in question seems to have more interest in perpetuating the problem.

And, all that aside, there hasn't been a comment yet that gave any significant information about future plot developments.

 

I'm not perpetuating anything. The person who's giving out spoilers is. I've simply asked for that to stop. If asking someone to stop giving out spoilers (and having to do so repeatedly) is "perpetuating" the problem by somehow goading others to continue to give out spoilers, then I guess I'm causing the problem, using some very twisted logic.

It baffles me why someone would want to give out spoilers in the first place in a thread about a tv series. A thread that's specifically titled so - not titled something like "Compare Stephen King's book "Under the Dome" to the tv series of the same name".

Your definition of "bitchy" is odd too - I even used the word "please" in my original post (#47) asking to stop with the spoilers. The person addressed came back and said he should be compared to a movie critic, so should be allowed to say whatever he wants.

After giving another spoiler away, the thread starter also asked for this person to stop giving out spoilers (#56). After a number of posts referring to what happened in the book again, I had to request that he stop giving out more spoilers (#91). At least two people agreed with my post. And the thread starter has now asked that any discussion related to what happens in the book be taken elsewhere.

It's sad that this has become as much of an issue instead of just being able to talk about the episodes that have been shown.

 

I don't think of myself as a Stephen King fan these days, but still wind up reading his books. The Stand remains in my mind one of the strongest, along with the book about the kids and the evil clown. I certainly remember The Shining as a film, but don't remember if I read it as a book (though I must have).
The one that sticks with me, for sheer irony, I guess, is the book where everybody talking on a cell phone turns into a zombie.
I guess you could say it struck a chord.
He modernized the horror novel and brought it out of the gothic or schlock into mainstream reading for recent generations.
But, I think he could use some judicious editing- I doubt anybody has the clout to do that, though. Sometimes, I feel like I'm reading filler. And yes, I read The Dome. Haven't tuned into the TV series yet. (I'm a few years behind- still enjoying my first viewing of The Wire, now up to season 3).

 

No-one has mentioned the story's similarity to Joe R. Lansdale's Drive-In.

I will admit that the similarities are likely superficial, and that, as Vidiot has said, the point of the story is what the people do to each other, which is likely very different from Lansdale's story (it's wonky, to say the least! More like bat-sh!t crazy...)

 

Why doesn't Aggie87 make use of the ignore feature to hide Vidiots posts?

I think it is perfectly acceptable to analyze the differences between a series and the book it is based upon. Seems unreasonable to me to expect people not to do so.

 

That is a real problem. I noticed that half the fire shots in the show were partial-CG, and most of them used controlled-gas lines (a little too "nice and neat"), which is very typical for TV. The threat of fires getting out of control on sets is an ever-present danger.

I worked on Billy Friedkin's movie Bug a few years ago, and the climax of the film involved a motel fire. Friedkin wanted a pretty big explosion and fire, and they were kind of stunned when it really went up BIG on the set, requiring even more firefighters than they had planned. Luckily, the film cameras captured it all and the exposure was still controllable to the point where it looked fine in theaters. TV shows like Under the Dome don't have that luxury (plus they're shooting on digital, which doesn't have the latitude of film).

I'll do my best to hold back on any future spoilers, but I think I've been pretty vague thus far. Wikipedia will tell you the whole plot if you want it now. The key issues really boil down to "who's going to survive" and "how will they survive," and the producers have made it clear that they've strayed from the book. I think it's pretty clear who the heroes and villains are, so you can draw your own conclusions. What I can't figure out is how the producers think they could get 2 or 3 seasons of 36 episodes out of this thing! At best, the idea is a 3-hour TV movie (to me). Something like The Stand or Dark Tower would clearly be something that would take 12 hours plus to tell, if you included all the characters and situations.

 

That fire scene in Bug seemed very realistic for a movie.