Under The Dome

[tippy4]

I thought it was a good effect...they just overlooked one detail.

[mae]

I thought the cow effect was stellar.

[Bryant Burnette]

To the best of my knowledge, cows' insides do not look like gummy bears dipped in raspberry sauce. I am no expert, though; still, it looked fake as could be to my eyes.

Not that it makes that big a difference. It was a cool idea, and the scene still works. I kinda miss poor Mr. Woodchuck, but a bifurcated cow is a good replacement.

[Bev Vincent]

Are you sure it was an effect? I hear they had a steak dinner that day on the set...

[Heather19]

To the best of my knowledge, cows' insides do not look like gummy bears dipped in raspberry sauce. I am no expert, though; still, it looked fake as could be to my eyes.

Not that it makes that big a difference. It was a cool idea, and the scene still works. I kinda miss poor Mr. Woodchuck, but a bifurcated cow is a good replacement.

I agree. I thought the same thing. Where was his brain or bones? It was just red goo.

[mae]

Maybe smeared because of the whole being sliced by the dome thing?

[Bryant Burnette]

Are you sure it was an effect? I hear they had a steak dinner that day on the set...

Mmm...steak...

[Merlin1958]

Maybe smeared because of the whole being sliced by the dome thing?

That was my take on it. Irf you really give it thought, it's not like a knife or other cutting blade where the cutting implement does it's damage and leaves the remains. The Dome (The cutting instrument) remained intact and in place causing the remains to slide down resulting in the smearing of blood over what would normally be considered the "details", if you catch my drift. I thought it was well thought out IMO.

[mtdman]

Maybe smeared because of the whole being sliced by the dome thing?

That was my take on it. Irf you really give it thought, it's not like a knife or other cutting blade where the cutting implement does it's damage and leaves the remains. The Dome (The cutting instrument) remained intact and in place causing the remains to slide down resulting in the smearing of blood over what would normally be considered the "details", if you catch my drift. I thought it was well thought out IMO.

I thought the cow effect was cool. As was the truck smashing into the dome. Overall I really dug the episode and enjoyed the show. I like the minor changes that were made. Although, I must admist Jr's 'interaction' with Angie in the book was pretty damned creepy and I was looking forward to seeing that. But the way the show changed that was actually pretty good.

I like the fact that Jeff Fehey is the sheriff. I have always liked him. Too bad he didn't last long. The guy that plays Big Jim is a lot more likeable than the audio portrayal as well. And the Schumway chick is far more likeable too.

Is the lesbian couple with the troubled daughter a complete fabrication for the show or are they meant to replace characters in the book? I can't remember all the side characters, I seem to remember a family in the book.

[divemaster]

The lesbian couple is a new fabrication. Their daughter "Norrie" was the 13-year-old in the book that helped her teen friends Scarecrow Joe and Benny(?). Joe (now the brother of Angie!) and Norrie are obviously older for the TV show.

[mae]

And Joe's last name is McAlister instead if McClatchey for some reason.

[Bryant Burnette]

And Joe's last name is McAlister instead if McClatchey for some reason.

Might be a legal reason. Might also be because if you just hear the name "McClatchey," it sounds a little weird/unfamiliar. McAlister is a lot easier to wrap your brain around if you aren't actually seeing the name. I'd say it's probably a good change.

[divemaster]

I'm curious how they are going to handle Rusty being outside the Dome. He played such a huge role in the novel.

[Bryant Burnette]

I wouldn't have thought it was possible for a series to jump the shark as soon as its second episode, but doggone if Under the Dome doesn't seem to have done it. What a shitty episode.

[Iwritecode]

They are moving slow, which I expected, but I didn't see anything wrong with the episode. I've liked it so far.

[divemaster]

The episode blew. I assumed preacher Coggins intentionally set the house on fire as the scene was playing out. What else would he expect when you start a trash fire next to the curtains? But then he's all "oh no, the house is on fire" and tries to put it out? I'm not sure if that was bad plotting or bad acting, but it was bad.

And are we supposed to believe Barbie, who is obviously some sort of enforcer, would allow his dog tags to remain at the scene of the crime? It reminded me of the scene in True Romance where the mob enforcer is laughing at the fact that Clarence ("fuckhead") would have gotten away with it, but he left his driver's licence at the scene! Barbie is supposed to be the hero, or at least the respected protagonist. I don't want him portrayed as an incompetent fuckhead.

And why would that cop get all paranoid and weirded out like that? I'm not saying he couldn't, but the show gave no perspective or background. In a well-written show, character actions stem from some sort of background; not just appear out of the blue.

And that's also what seems to be going on with Junior. Why is he acting that way? In the book it was a combination of a sense of entitlement along with a brain tumor. Based on what we've seen so far, there's no clue or rationale for Junior's actions. According to Angie, he's never acted anything close to this since the third grade. I hope it does turn out to be a brain tumor in the show, otherwise we've just got to accept that a person has a complete change of character in about 5 minutes.

I actually liked the pilot. I'll keep watching, but if the next couple of episodes are as poorly written/characterized as this one, well, I might bail.

[Bryant Burnette]

The episode blew. I assumed preacher Coggins intentionally set the house on fire as the scene was playing out. What else would he expect when you start a trash fire next to the curtains? But then he's all "oh no, the house is on fire" and tries to put it out? I'm not sure if that was bad plotting or bad acting, but it was bad.

And are we supposed to believe Barbie, who is obviously some sort of enforcer, would allow his dog tags to remain at the scene of the crime? It reminded me of the scene in True Romance where the mob enforcer is laughing at the fact that Clarence ("fuckhead") would have gotten away with it, but he left his driver's licence at the scene! Barbie is supposed to be the hero, or at least the respected protagonist. I don't want him portrayed as an incompetent fuckhead.

And why would that cop get all paranoid and weirded out like that? I'm not saying he couldn't, but the show gave no perspective or background. In a well-written show, character actions stem from some sort of background; not just appear out of the blue.

And that's also what seems to be going on with Junior. Why is he acting that way? In the book it was a combination of a sense of entitlement along with a brain tumor. Based on what we've seen so far, there's no clue or rationale for Junior's actions. According to Angie, he's never acted anything close to this since the third grade. I hope it does turn out to be a brain tumor in the show, otherwise we've just got to accept that a person has a complete change of character in about 5 minutes.

I actually liked the pilot. I'll keep watching, but if the next couple of episodes are as poorly written/characterized as this one, well, I might bail.

Agreed on all points. I thought it was bad bordering on incompetence.

In days long gone, you'd see stuff like this on tv and sorta shrug and say to yourself, "Well, it's just a television show, whattaya expect?" Those days have been over (for me at least) at least a decade; probably a bit longer. There's just no excuse for an episode of tv being this bad anymore.

[Iwritecode]

I agree on the first point with Coggins and the fire. I wasn't quite sure what he was doing or trying to do there. The other points I didn't really notice because stuff like that happens on pretty much every tv show ever. They need to have the characters doing something and they haven't had nearly enough time to really explore the backgrounds of even the major characters yet.

Although it's possible that I just don't watch enough tv to really know bad from good. I don't watch much other than this show, Sons of Anarchy, and re-runs of old sitcoms.

[neosatus]

So far I'm rather disappointed with the show. My main complaint it that it is disgustingly clean. It's not even partially conducive to immersibility. I could list literally dozens of complaints under that broad banner.

I know the series departs a bit from the original work, but there are many aspects which were done unnecessarily so, imo. Some of the characters are too far off from their original feel.

Many parts were laughably unrealistic. At the end of episode 2, the fire is somehow miraculously put out by the house being collapsed? LOL Yeah, right.

[neosatus]

The episode blew. I assumed preacher Coggins intentionally set the house on fire as the scene was playing out. What else would he expect when you start a trash fire next to the curtains? But then he's all "oh no, the house is on fire" and tries to put it out? I'm not sure if that was bad plotting or bad acting, but it was bad.

And are we supposed to believe Barbie, who is obviously some sort of enforcer, would allow his dog tags to remain at the scene of the crime? It reminded me of the scene in True Romance where the mob enforcer is laughing at the fact that Clarence ("fuckhead") would have gotten away with it, but he left his driver's licence at the scene! Barbie is supposed to be the hero, or at least the respected protagonist. I don't want him portrayed as an incompetent fuckhead.

And why would that cop get all paranoid and weirded out like that? I'm not saying he couldn't, but the show gave no perspective or background. In a well-written show, character actions stem from some sort of background; not just appear out of the blue.

And that's also what seems to be going on with Junior. Why is he acting that way? In the book it was a combination of a sense of entitlement along with a brain tumor. Based on what we've seen so far, there's no clue or rationale for Junior's actions. According to Angie, he's never acted anything close to this since the third grade. I hope it does turn out to be a brain tumor in the show, otherwise we've just got to accept that a person has a complete change of character in about 5 minutes.

I actually liked the pilot. I'll keep watching, but if the next couple of episodes are as poorly written/characterized as this one, well, I might bail.

Agreed on all points. I thought it was bad bordering on incompetence.

In days long gone, you'd see stuff like this on tv and sorta shrug and say to yourself, "Well, it's just a television show, whattaya expect?" Those days have been over (for me at least) at least a decade; probably a bit longer. There's just no excuse for an episode of tv being this bad anymore.

Yeah, there really no excuse, especially with the amount of funding the show received.

Look at recent series such as Breaking Bad, Homeland, Boardwalk Empire, just to name a few. Television series of recent days are vastly better than most films produced, even. So to produce something this terribly bad, in contrast to these other series, really says a lot about the studio and producers that are messing up this show.

[Merlin1958]

They are moving slow, which I expected, but I didn't see anything wrong with the episode. I've liked it so far.

I'm with you. I'm gonna give it a chance to develop more.

Edit: It would seem that they intend to use "Flash-backs" to fill in back story IMHO

[Bryant Burnette]

Look at recent series such as Breaking Bad, Homeland, Boardwalk Empire, just to name a few. Television series of recent days are vastly better than most films produced, even. So to produce something this terribly bad, in contrast to these other series, really says a lot about the studio and producers that are messing up this show.

Absolutely. Can't wait for Boardwalk to return; that last season was superb.

There are enough genuinely good shows that it's difficult to keep up with them all, especially since Netflix is in that game now. I'm going to be watching Under the Dome for the duration, because I'm a King fan and I watch even the shittiest of the shitty stuff base don his work. If not for that connection, I'd probably be done with this show based on the second episode. And I bet a lot of people will bail out; watch for the ratings to plummet next week.

[Bryant Burnette]

[QUOTE=Merlin1958;786739]

It would seem that they intend to use "Flash-backs" to fill in back story IMHO

I would tend to agree with you; hopefully that will result in more Jeff Fahey.

[mtdman]

I liked episode 2, and I'm totally digging this series so far. I am very pleasantly surprised!

[Stebbins]

I liked episode 2, and I'm totally digging this series so far. I am very pleasantly surprised!

I'm the opposite. I thought it'd be cool with me reading the book just before and all, but really I'm irked. The changes in characters and thinking back to how well written the book was just gets to me. I don't think it's bad-- excellent casting for Big Jim and some other roles-- I just don't like it nearly as much as the book, and subsequently cannot become engrossed in it.