Should Under the Dome crawl under a rock?

From: http://underthedometv.com/

Back in 2010, I wrote about Stephen King's novel Under the Dome. I enjoyed the book. Unfortunately, however, I have not enjoyed the television series adaptation. In fact, I would say the television series is more of a mutation than an adaptation of the original story. Mutations can make for some good storytelling in the right science fiction plot. That is not the case with Under the Dome.

Many of the comments contained in online reviews about season two of the series criticize lazy writing and poor plot development. While there is, sadly, an abundance of this in season two, I think the poor reception to the series also has to do with the fact that it is difficult to have any real emotional connection to the characters. Granted, this is connected to poor writing because the stilted dialogue does make it difficult for the actors to offer a convincing performance. Yet, there were so many subplots taking place that I found myself waiting for conclusions, hoping a new subplot would allow for a bit more character development and give me a reason to care about at least one character.

I compare my gradual disengagement with the show to how I feel with much of the weak offerings on "reality" television. In the end, I have a hard time rooting for anyone on a series like Big Brother, and find myself, not really giving a care in the world who ends up the winner. Much of that attitude also surfaces with shows like Under the Dome. It is unfortunate, because while I found season one a bit bumpy and awkward, it was watchable. I was hoping the show would find its feet by season two. By the fourth episode, however, it appeared evident that season two would be cut off at the knees before the finale. I cannot personally confirm it was horribly maimed, since I stopped watching the show, but given what I have read online, it appears the show is seriously struggling.

Yet, while the number of viewers who watch the show has fallen significantly, it has been renewed for a third season and many fans have come out swinging in defence of the series. Several reader comments found on online reviews of the show express their commitment to the series, and how much they enjoy each episode. I might have taken more stock in these comments if many of these fans did not compare the show to Lost. Season one of Under the Dome was watchable, but it certainly did not have the style nor the creativity displayed in the Lost series.

Ultimately, I think the show's biggest failing was the lack of character development. As I mentioned in an older post on King's novel, he spent less time on the "technical side" of what was happening in the storyline and instead focused and developed his characters, displaying all the goodness, and nastiness, that makes up who we are. I think if the television series had stuck to a similar exploration, the show would be offering its audience a much more engaging and fulfilling viewing experience.

Sadly, Under the Dome appears to be part of a crop of what I see as bland science fiction offered on television right now. I enjoy a good television series, but lately most shows that keep me coming back for more have not been science fiction. I tried to get into Helix, but after watching the first episode, I have yet to revisit the series. Netflix has led me to some "older" science fiction that I never watched when it was current, such as The 4400, and I have watched most of the TorchWood series for the second time. The fact that I am watching older shows I never viewed, and revisiting shows I have watched before, makes me wonder about the state of science-fiction on television.

Granted, The Leftovers was engaging and I am looking forward to the next season. Extant had some decent episodes, although I am hoping season two develops smoother than season one did. Even The 100 was pretty entertaining, although I quickly realized that a forty something year old man was definitely not the target audience for the series. The premise of the show has some intriguing elements, although the plot development has some glorious lame moments. Additionally, the show has some serious continuity issues when it comes to character appearances, leading me to think it would be better if all of the main male characters had brush cuts.

If there is a current show, however, that gives me hope for engaging science fiction on television, it is Orphan Black. In my view, Orphan Black is what makes for a good science fiction series: an exploration of a "what-if" in terms of science or technology (or both) combined with solid character development and strong acting. It is, essentially, what Under the Dome is not. And the show is served up in a gritty realism that is so refreshing from the polished stiff products we normally see on television.

Perhaps one of the biggest reason for what seems to be a void in the realm of good science fiction storytelling on television has more to do with the fact that any promising new shows are still in their infancy. I certainly hope so. At any rate, there is always Doctor Who, right? I have to get caught up on that soon too!