Under the Dome:

Total posts: [15]
I have just finished this, and while it was lacking in many areas compared to King's better works, I still found it a solid novel.

Amongst the user reviews, I keep reading that King lost his edge around 1985. But that's just not true: The Eyes of the Dragon, Hearts in Atlantis, From a Buick 8, The Dark Half, The Dark Tower 2-3-4-5, Misery... just to name a few great works he has written since that year.

My question is: Do you think his work is getting weaker or not? And of course: what do you think about Under the Dome?
"We have done the impossible and that makes us mighty." - Malcolm Reynolds
His political strawmen and religious stereotypes have gotten progressively worse over the years (barring The Stand and Desperation), but they're positively gratuitous in Dome. Other than that, from what I've read so far, it seems an interesting read.
King used to be dark and edgy. Now he invented anew subgenre: Dull dark and edgy.

It's the same flavor King, just more filler.
The Blood God's design consultant.
Raven Wilder
I enjoyed a lot of the book, but I feel that King either needed to cut down how much screentime Big Jim Rennie got, or give him some sort of depth or complexity. Complete Monsters get dull quickly, so elevating one to Villain Protagonist status was a bad choice, in my opinion.
"It takes an idiot to do cool things, that's why it's cool" - Haruhara Haruko
5 Abracadavre15th Apr 2011 12:33:30 PM from The Omega 4 Relay
I actually thought Big Jim was gonna die when Carter was gonna shoot him. Then he killed Carter, and I said "FFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCCCK!!!"

edited 15th Apr '11 12:34:11 PM by Abracadavre

"I'm the Avatar! You gotta deal with it!"
6 Willbyr15th Apr 2011 04:15:19 PM from North Little Rock, AR , Relationship Status: Pining for the fjords
King's post-accident work has been a little less consistent, but no less enjoyable for me. I liked the seventh Dark Tower book; Cell and Lisey's Story were alright, Just After Sunset was good, and I really liked Duma Key and Under the Dome. Haven't read Full Dark, No Stars yet.
FDNS is great, it has everything you need from King, and then some! evil grin
"We have done the impossible and that makes us mighty." - Malcolm Reynolds
8 joeyjojo26th Jun 2013 10:45:32 PM from South Sydney: go the bunnies!
Happy New Year!
Should I make a new thread for the tv show or just post here?
  1. hashtagsarestupid
9 FuzzyBoots1st Jul 2013 06:33:44 AM from Pittsburgh, PA , Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
Wanderer (Not Lost)
I'd say put it in Live Action TV. There are bound to be differences.
10 joeyjojo1st Jul 2013 04:32:35 PM from South Sydney: go the bunnies!
Happy New Year!
Does anyone watch the show? I would hate to launch of thread and have it just gather dust.

edited 1st Jul '13 4:33:31 PM by joeyjojo

  1. hashtagsarestupid
Haven't seen the show yet, plan to, but I read the book. Too many characters and Rennie is just a bit much, but I enjoyed it.
12 joeyjojo1st Jul 2013 04:54:14 PM from South Sydney: go the bunnies!
Happy New Year!
  1. hashtagsarestupid
13 TamH703rd Jul 2013 07:21:03 AM , Relationship Status: Faithful to 2D
I didn't really like this one. I finished it, of course, but it wasn't one of his best by any stretch of the imagination. Even the last book of the Dark Tower saga was better and the ending for that one is one of the worst in the whole canon of western literature since ever.

As I said on the thread for the telly prog, I saw the same thing with the Simpsons at the cinema and that stuff was both funny and dramatic. This was too relentlessly downbeat.
14 DeMarquis3rd Jul 2013 02:17:04 PM from Hell, USA , Relationship Status: Buried in snow, waiting for spring
Who Am I?
King is a good writer who seems to enjoy re-using the same plot elements over and over. His descriptive narration is excellent, his characters, not so much.
I do not compromise—I synthesize.
15 FuzzyBoots8th Jul 2013 09:20:06 AM from Pittsburgh, PA , Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
Wanderer (Not Lost)
My viewpoint on King's writing is that he's best off when he gets away from things that go bump in the night. Frankly, when King starts to describe the supernatural itself, he's dull. Now where he excels is getting into the mind of mad characters. He'll take a crazy person, put you in the middle of their monologue, and you come away feeling like you understand the madness, and have been sullied by the contact.

As for Under the Dome, I enjoyed reading it, haven't seen the TV show. I liked the premise of the real villains being cruel alien kids although I felt the resolution was a bit Deus ex Machina in nature. I could see people breaking down as they did. They say that power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely, and just a taste of power creates a man who would be a tyrant if he could be.
The system doesn't know you right now, so no post button for you.
You need to Get Known to get one of those.

Total posts: 15