Under the Dome Spoiler Discussion - Page 2

Just finished this. So far, everyone's opinion is about spot on with mine. Big Jim is a great character. I kept seeing John Goodman and a friend's father as Rennie. Everyone else... kinda bland. It was a hell of a pessimistic ending, with character after character dropping dead, down to the last page. Like tc3ii, I kept waiting for someone to bring up killing Rennie and putting in martial law. You have two police officers talking and both describe the man as Hitler, early in the book to boot, and no one thinks to blow off his head. Why is Barbie so set against it?

It is an incredibly readable mess of a book. I was churning pages. But, I think putting Barbie as the main character messed it all up. I would rather have seen Rusty as the main character. Keep the focus there, have Barbie's events related to us, but keep Rusty as the focus. The development of Friends of Barbie never made sense either. If the town is small enough that everyone knows everyone else, they would know that Barbie burning down the 70 year old newspaper makes no sense, even in Chef or late novel Sanders head.

How does King skip the most heart rending possibility of the novel by ignoring the families on the outside of the dome? You have people watching their family being charbroiled against a clear dome. CNN is covering it live and you don't allow Wolf Blitzer to even comment on the aftermath? We don't even get a great image of the immolation.

The technical details were terrible and I have to agree with someone up top, he has lost the ability to write believable kids anymore. I couldn't find a riot grrrl now if wanted to (high school English teacher), and this is set 4 years from now. All this emailing and yet we are photocopying the newspaper. You have a giant automated radio station that is broadcasting Jesus music, but it only serves to get people to turn off the radio and have gunfights in the parking lot.

Fun read, overall, but no where near what I would call Stephen King classic. It's got the makings of being great, but somewhere in the process an editor needed to step in and go 'Whoa, big fella'

Positive: Couldn't put it down.

 

Negative: Rushed at the end. Missed opportunities that were set up and dropped.

 

I read through this entire thread and didn't see this mentioned. Towards the end of the book, when the town is gathering to see their family/friends on the other side of the dome, someone refers to Sammy's rape, but she is called Sandy.

 

Hmmm.

It really wound me up too! I was gripped, night after nigh for about 3 weeks. I found the ending extremely dissapointing! To think that all they had to do was go say "please let us out" and it lifted! Stupid ending and majorlly dissapointed !

Why didnt they just dig a tunnel under the dome?

Its the obvious solution.

I'm really surprised by all the nitpicking of this great book.  I loved it so much, and didn't feel the ending was weak.  I think he's being more ambitious and more courageous with this angry novel than he has been in decades.  But, alas, it's been too long since I read it for me to really discuss in depth some of the complaints, plus, I'm a quarter of the way through his new book. 

Hope I'm not too late. Just finished.

 

I read most of the other posts and I have to say I don't really agree with them that much. Regarding those who said the book took too long and was drawn out, come on now your going to tell me you didn't flip to the next page immediately? I also feel most of his detail, like the VADER file and the kids having the flashes of halloween, added to the mystery of the book. He kept us guessing until he finally wanted to reveal the secrets of the Dome. If he didn't do this the book would've been, "Hey guys, its aliens behind the whole thing see, they've got this purple light out in this field and..." NO! What kind of story would that have been? I can't defend the fact the book was perfect and had everything because nothing is perfect, but to nitpick, like most of you all did is, is unfair. 

 

And for Pete's sake: JOHN GOODMAN is the only man who can play Big Jim Rennie.

As for Barbara I'm in a toss up between Mark Wahlberg or Edward Norton

Just Finised with the book. (On that note, if you read the book for the first time NOW you might very well miss the fact it was set "in the future") and so far I am glad to see that the majority of the complaints are things i've seen myself.

 

1) The whole deal with Norrie kissing Ben, but then the even being referenced to Joe. That definately caught my eye as i was reading.

 

2) I was reading the large print edition (only copy i had access to) so it might have been due to that, but I caught more than one typo.

 

3) As everybody has mentioned, yes, the ending felt very rushed. I feel like alot of points that could have been used to wrap-up the story were missed. With all the mention of the blonde in the pickemup truck, I really would have figured we might see her again.

 

4) Rennie TOTALLY should have gone out in a much more gruesome and torturous fashion. Just saying. I also second the notion that SOMEBODY should have brought up the idea of killing him.

 

As far as all that goes, I still feel like it was a really fun read. The first few chapters really have a good pace to them, the middle kind of drug on and on, but then the last few chapters sped right back up.It wasn't until I got on here and found this forum that I even thought about how unneccesary the VADER file was, and in retrospect it only partly bothers me, as I see it as a "well this is one way things could go...." type of deal. 

 

Now, onto something that I have been seeing alot of in this debate that I would like to bring into discussion (provided there is anybody still watching this). For this, I turn to wikipedia.

This involves the symbol on the box that, as has been mentioned, was the symbol on the door if IT's lair.

 

"Stephen King is not entirely clear on the character's (IT) origins, but It apparently originated in a void containing and surrounding the universe, a place referred to in the novel as the "Macroverse" "

 

Has anybody considered that maybe, the leatherheads were on the same...i'll say "species" for lack of a better term, as IT? The wiki entry for the novel IT goes on to say...

 

" It's natural form exists in a realm beyond the physical, in the area past the edge of the universe, a form which It calls the "deadlights." As such, the deadlights are never seen in their entirety, only partly shown through a metaphysical cage that surrounds our universe and It's true form outside the physical world is revealed to only be writhing, destructive orange lights."

 

While the orange lights are never mentioned in Dome, it could very well stand to reason that the leatherheads were not in fact aliens, or, if you will, that IT was IT'self (see what I did there? nyuck nyuck nyuck) an alien.

 

Anyways. Glad to see other people have had the same feelings as i have about this book. Thank you, vast pool of internet denziens, for letting me rant and theorize.

 

Well, I think it's established that IT was, in fact, an alien. Like you said, IT comes from an "area past the edge of the universe".  Likely IT is interdimensional.