• Network: CBS
  • Series Premiere Date: Jun 24, 2013
  • Season #: 1 , 2
User Score
5.9

Mixed or average reviews- based on 365 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 97 out of 365

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jun 26, 2013
    4
    Not impressed by far. The characters seems rather one sided and clichéd. We already know who will be bad (Junior, 'Big Jim' Rennie etc...) and who will play the good ones Linda, Joe McAlister etc.) in my opinion. I think there will be many romance added to the show. People behaved irrationally so far (throw a party next to a giant energy field?!?!?). The story might progress, but I thinkNot impressed by far. The characters seems rather one sided and clichéd. We already know who will be bad (Junior, 'Big Jim' Rennie etc...) and who will play the good ones Linda, Joe McAlister etc.) in my opinion. I think there will be many romance added to the show. People behaved irrationally so far (throw a party next to a giant energy field?!?!?). The story might progress, but I think I have already seen the bad vs. good people, and who joins which side story already. Seem to me it will be a soap-opera wrapped in a science-fiction "dome". Not happy with this, but it might become good later. Expand
  2. Jul 11, 2013
    0
    I had really high hopes for this show, it was just awful. I'm going to give it a 0/10, I just didn't like one thing about it. This is awful. Its just terrible.
  3. Jun 25, 2013
    7
    I was very impressed with the pilot episode, the casting choices are spot on and the characters are all compelling and likable. It's well written and paced, the acting is really good. So far so good, it's shaping up to be a hit summer show.
  4. Jun 30, 2013
    2
    I have tried to come up with a reasonable review but the only thing I can think of is disappointment. Read the book, the acting is much better and the scenery is superior too.
  5. Jul 7, 2013
    0
    It seems like the show's creators have been living under a dome. Do the creators of a network series like this even watch TV? If so, obviously not shows like Boardwalk Empire, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, The Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, etc. It's hard to point out exactly where this series goes wrong because there is so much wrong here. The script is so transparent, the exposition so clumsy,It seems like the show's creators have been living under a dome. Do the creators of a network series like this even watch TV? If so, obviously not shows like Boardwalk Empire, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, The Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, etc. It's hard to point out exactly where this series goes wrong because there is so much wrong here. The script is so transparent, the exposition so clumsy, it's painful to watch the actors go through the motions of their flat, clichéd characters. They seem uninspired and bored. It feels like I'm watching a soap. Even the soundtrack is like a soap. Sad. Dumb. Sad. Et tu, Speilberg? Expand
  6. Jul 7, 2013
    1
    What a poor and distasteful interpretation of Stephen King's suspenseful novel. Even if you have not had the chance to read the novel please do not make your judgements of the book based off of your like or dislike of the show. It's an extremely loose adaptation at best. The show only preserves the names of the characters and the concept from the original text. The show aside from the bookWhat a poor and distasteful interpretation of Stephen King's suspenseful novel. Even if you have not had the chance to read the novel please do not make your judgements of the book based off of your like or dislike of the show. It's an extremely loose adaptation at best. The show only preserves the names of the characters and the concept from the original text. The show aside from the book is a pathetic example of quality television and writing. Within the first 30 minutes of the first episode we're introduced to too many characters through too much poorly executed exposition with cheap dialogue delivered by stale acting. How this show is gaining popularity is beyond me however, after the second episode and reviews from the latter it's proving to be a faulty showing standing on brittle legs ready to collapse at any minute. I have a feeling that after a few more episodes the cracks will bust and the show will completely fall apart. Don't waste your time with this show just hope that maybe a few years down the line real writers and a progressive network will pick up the book and do it justice. Expand
  7. Jul 16, 2013
    0
    This is defiantly the worst show of the summer. The acting and writing is just awful, the plot is predictable, and it is just terribly made. CBS programming has been pretty trashy in the last couple years. This show confirms this for me. If you like decent programming stay away from this show.
  8. Jul 2, 2013
    0
    Sorry.....I'm a huge fan of the book and these re-writes are TERRIBLE. There's a big reason why Stephen King is mega-famous and the writers of this show are not. Horribly disappointed. Read the book....it's amazing.
  9. Jun 25, 2013
    10
    Speaking as someone who read, listened to rather, and enjoyed the book I am very excited about this show. Going into the first episode my only concerns were the acting and how the camera work was going to look, and it looked great. Not just great for CBS, just great. The large majority of the cast impressed me also, I wish big Jim sounded like he did in the audio book cause Raul EsparzaSpeaking as someone who read, listened to rather, and enjoyed the book I am very excited about this show. Going into the first episode my only concerns were the acting and how the camera work was going to look, and it looked great. Not just great for CBS, just great. The large majority of the cast impressed me also, I wish big Jim sounded like he did in the audio book cause Raul Esparza totally nailed it, but I'll give old Hank Schrader a shot. The story is going to unfold into some creepy twists and turns and the naysayers are going to come around. This will potential be better than 96% of any of Stephen King adaptations on Film or TV. Expand
  10. Jun 25, 2013
    5
    The premise of the show is interesting but it is spoilt by some very poor characters played by B grade actors. Also the CGI is woeful. The various storylines are very cliched.
  11. Jun 25, 2013
    4
    Bad acting, bad dialogue, bad CGI. Maybe i'm too spoiled with shows like Mad Men/Game Of Thrones/Breaking Bad, still doesn't excuse the pure dreadfulness and it's cheap cliches
  12. Jun 27, 2013
    10
    Under the Dome was the series that I waited the most and hoping to be good, after being disappointed with Bates Motel, Under the Dome pleased me, it was well written, well directed, well acted and the dialogue is good, everything is good so far, I think it is going to be a blast.
  13. Jul 1, 2013
    2
    I think I have finally reached my limit of dystopian/apocalyptic survival premises in which Conrad's Heart of Darkness is played over and over again. The only thing that's missing here is cannibalism, but maybe if I stick around long enough (fat chance), someone will dine on another. Enough already.
  14. Aug 3, 2013
    0
    The roles the actors are asked to play are not characters, they are caricatures, thinly draw yet at times comically over exaggerated. The insanely jealous 'boyfriend' is the worst of many examples. No matter how good a story might be (and I won't even stick around to see how the story evolves) I cannot get past such a flaw in the writing.
  15. Jul 5, 2013
    3
    I read the book, I am a big Stephen King, and there have been the occasional King book that has been translated effectively to film but rarely. I still held out hopes for this project, since it had the length to tell the story in detail, and CBS clearly lavished funds toward it. But I was surprised by the inferiority and mediocrity of the project, from casting to camerawork to script.I read the book, I am a big Stephen King, and there have been the occasional King book that has been translated effectively to film but rarely. I still held out hopes for this project, since it had the length to tell the story in detail, and CBS clearly lavished funds toward it. But I was surprised by the inferiority and mediocrity of the project, from casting to camerawork to script. It had such a B quality about it, from the first frame and that surprised me most. It's not that the actors weren't familiar to me, or that they weren't major names, but their characterizations were so flat and generic, like soap opera characters. Additionally, as the intersection of actor and scripted character, they were also unsympathetic and unappealing. When I considered giving the second episode a shot, part of what deterred me is that I didn't like the characters enough to care. They were abrasive, unlikeable, unappealing, unsympathetic, opaque. I just didn't really care. They weren't real people, but caricatures "tough female reporter" "hunky troubled stubbled lead" "snarly older town boss" "Latina woman cop" etc. The camerawork was cheese. All the formulaic pans and closeups, and whatever else network TV does. Network cinematographers must do these camera maneuvers in their sleep, and dream of breaking free of the cliches. The script was flat and obvious pulling what I imagine were the most obvious plot-forwarding lines, or condensing into cliches. Stephen King is a brilliant underrated writer. The lines were soap-opera level. Ultimately, what was tense and atmospheric and quirky in print was mediocre soap-opera with network pacing leading to commercial breaks. Yuk. Yuk. Yuk. For a superior small-screen adaptation of Stephen King's vision, check out "The Mist." Expand
  16. Jul 9, 2013
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. You Stephen King fans out there: "Under The Dome" Spoiler Alert! Don't expect the excellent translation to the small screen like they did with "The Stand" or even "Salem's Lot". Hollywood took this masterwork of Mr. King's (his best next to "The Stand" and shoved it through the shredder. Then they patched up all of the holes with new characters and added a completely altered story-line. They basically just kept the title. Why tamper with perfection? SKIP THE TV!!! READ THE BOOK! Expand
  17. Aug 20, 2013
    3
    This is one of those instances where a show gets worse episode by episode. It suffers from two common network TV flaws: 1) the premise demands resolution but the series is open-ended. So you get episode after episode with teasing plot threads that go nowhere. 2) the writing is mediocre. Standard melodrama stuff. Under the Dome would have made a much better miniseries.
  18. Jul 18, 2013
    2
    After watching the first two episodes I couldn't understand how Stephen King who I believe is an above average author would create such a simplistic and silly plot. King usually creates quite lifelike and vivid characters, not the kid's play that I saw on television.

    So I bought the book...and I can tell you that the series is a not even close to what I've read until now. Well, there's
    After watching the first two episodes I couldn't understand how Stephen King who I believe is an above average author would create such a simplistic and silly plot. King usually creates quite lifelike and vivid characters, not the kid's play that I saw on television.

    So I bought the book...and I can tell you that the series is a not even close to what I've read until now. Well, there's a dome, yep, they got that one right. And some of the character names are the same. But that's basically it.

    It's exactly what one would expect from network television these days. A water-downed plot, a few pretty faces and over 10 million people tuning in every week...
    Expand
  19. Jun 29, 2013
    4
    Unlike others, I don't think this is the show to watch this summer. It's got great potential (mostly because of its eccentric base), but I don't see this lasting. The show conveyed the same idea for an hour, we're trapped in a dome. It certainly has mystery, but not enough to keep me watching.
  20. Jul 8, 2013
    1
    The story lines is ok. but this is the only thing that not terrible in Under The Dome. The Chartres are very pathetic, the actors and actress just don't good.
  21. Aug 20, 2013
    0
    One of the most difficult-to-watch train wrecks of a show I've had the misfortune of viewing in recent years. I feel badly for the actors; bad direction, terrible cliché writing, flat inconsistent characters even skilled actors would be set up for failure.

    Breaking Bad: 74/100 Under the Dome: 72/100 clearly the "metascore" on here is quite meaningless if one of the best shows on
    One of the most difficult-to-watch train wrecks of a show I've had the misfortune of viewing in recent years. I feel badly for the actors; bad direction, terrible cliché writing, flat inconsistent characters even skilled actors would be set up for failure.

    Breaking Bad: 74/100 Under the Dome: 72/100 clearly the "metascore" on here is quite meaningless if one of the best shows on television and one of the worst score a mere 2 points apart.
    Expand
  22. Aug 27, 2013
    0
    Horrendous acting and writing. There is something completely off about this show and it is the setting. Why is no one worried that they are trapped in a dome? No one is rationing food. People are out walking their dogs like it's just another normal day. Main characters are laying in their beds at night reading a book under the light of their bed side lamps. Speaking of which, where isHorrendous acting and writing. There is something completely off about this show and it is the setting. Why is no one worried that they are trapped in a dome? No one is rationing food. People are out walking their dogs like it's just another normal day. Main characters are laying in their beds at night reading a book under the light of their bed side lamps. Speaking of which, where is everyone getting there electricity from? (I know, the whole propane story, but shouldn't they be rationing it for when it is ABSOLUTELY necessary?)

    I am baffled that this show gets so many viewers and shows that are truly great get so little in comparison...
    Expand
  23. Sep 3, 2013
    0
    Apart from Rachelle Lefevre, Mike Vogel and Britt Robertson, this sow is laughable beyond measure. The dialogue is kindergarten grade and the directing is amateurish. The writing is probably the worst part of it but the cast is a close second with atrocious performances. Too bad there isn't any Razzie Awards for TV shows.
  24. Jul 30, 2013
    4
    Teen drama overshadows a decent plot.
    The show catches your eye with the brilliant special effects and gripping narrative but fires blanks in the following episodes. The characters seem very one dimensional and fall short on likeability. The focus is set on unsatisfying micro storylines instead of the juicy macro one.
  25. Aug 21, 2013
    2
    This show is not very good. If i didn't see Breaking Bad i wouldn't know how great of an actor Dean Norris is. Rachelle Lefevre is from Revolution and plays pretty much the same type of character she did in that show and its very generic so i have no idea how much she can bring to her work. All the other actors seemingly do their jobs as best they can with a really terrible script. TheThis show is not very good. If i didn't see Breaking Bad i wouldn't know how great of an actor Dean Norris is. Rachelle Lefevre is from Revolution and plays pretty much the same type of character she did in that show and its very generic so i have no idea how much she can bring to her work. All the other actors seemingly do their jobs as best they can with a really terrible script. The problem with "under the Dome" is not the ideas for the world they exist in or the relationships and character choices but how quickly the characters are forced to service the next plot point without really being affected by the last drama they just experienced. Its like the show is going through a checklist of moments they have to hit for drama's sake. So the result is a seemingly very stupid script that doesn't even hold as much logic as a night time soap like "Revenge". Its like a series of short video clips of characters dealing with a bunch of writer's ideas for drama inside this domed town.
    What they should have done (regardless of the book's plot points which i never read) is let the character's choices affect the characters and develop in the character's relationship to how they deal with a few simple choices. There are way way way too many crazy plot developments for each character and the story lines are abandoned by the writing by the end of two episodes. It's as if it all didn't matter because now we are on to the next thing. Its like its written by a twelve year old. This show makes me yell at the screen "really? you just did that and now your going to just move on as if it never happened?"
    Expand
  26. Sep 2, 2013
    4
    I'm a Stephen King fan and a sci-fi fan so I gave the show a good chance. I never read the book. I'm on episode 11 of season 1. Sadly I think I've gotten to the point where my curiosity about the dome no longer outweighs how badly I feel about the boring story, the dull characters, the poor acting, and the unimaginative writing. Under the Dome is bad television and I expect that if II'm a Stephen King fan and a sci-fi fan so I gave the show a good chance. I never read the book. I'm on episode 11 of season 1. Sadly I think I've gotten to the point where my curiosity about the dome no longer outweighs how badly I feel about the boring story, the dull characters, the poor acting, and the unimaginative writing. Under the Dome is bad television and I expect that if I force myself to finish watching it for the sake of finding out what the dome actually is, I'll probably be disappointed anyway. Expand
  27. Dec 28, 2013
    2
    I was excited to see this show based but it ended up a huge disappointment and no better than Harper's Island (itself an atrocious TV serial). The characters in Under The Dome are paper thin to match the story. It is larded with cliche and contrived plot points, things like the following: Person A: "I wonder what the old sheriff was up to" Person B: "Well, he never walked around withoutI was excited to see this show based but it ended up a huge disappointment and no better than Harper's Island (itself an atrocious TV serial). The characters in Under The Dome are paper thin to match the story. It is larded with cliche and contrived plot points, things like the following: Person A: "I wonder what the old sheriff was up to" Person B: "Well, he never walked around without his hat." Person B then takes his hat from the coat rack and looks inside. "Hey, here's a key hidden in his brim." Person A: "I have one just like it, it opens a safety deposit box!" Person B: "Let's go!"
    I'm paraphrasing here, but not by much. This is just about the complexity of the story that runs throughout the entire series. I haven't even finished the final disc...I'm painstakingly making my way through the last few episodes.
    Another example is the town psycho is deputized after performing one nice deed. It makes absolutely no sense. The entire town knows he's a nutter! And there are so many contrived instances of drama, such as one of the police officer's pulling his gun on a crowd because he can't handle the pressure of the Dome. It makes absolutely zero sense, and there's no way a trained officer would crack like that. It's the type of shoe-horned drama that falls so flat it turns the desired moment laughable.
    There are also many "As you know Bob" moments, which is to say that a character says something that would never be said, but only to 'educate' the audience. An early example is how electronics stopped working and one character questions why his watch still works, and the female officer glances over at his watch and 2 seconds later says "I can see that watch is a windup...this must only effect battery operated devices" or some such nonsense that is telegraphed as information for the audience but in fact makes you feel like you're watching a teaching moment on par with Sesame Street.
    These ratings are certainly arbitrary. I gave it a 2. It could be a 1 or a 3 or some variant in-between. The point to bring home is it is very bad television.
    If you are a fan of mindlessly contrived auctioneers such as the aforementioned Harper's Island, or Prison Break, or 24 (though even 24 had some fun moments in the early seasons), then this would be right up your alley. But if you like smart television (the things you would see on HBO, AMC, Showtime), then this program is NOT for you.
    The fact that the critics have rated this a higher score than the users is, in fact, mind boggling. Normally I find that the critics have an eye for quality, at least more so than the masses. Here, inexplicably, the lower user score is the more reliable number (though still far too high, IMRO).
    Expand
  28. Jun 24, 2013
    5
    This show had real potential, but the dramatic element was overshadowed by unlikable characters. Sure, there is a bit of suspense and action every now and again, but at least three quarters of the characters are unbearable to watch. I did enjoy the visual effects and the plot, yet everything was poorly delivered. Maybe it will get better as the show goes on.
  29. Aug 21, 2013
    7
    Initially hated this show, gave it a 3 rating. I stuck with it due to running out of good shows to watch. After 5 eps I'd say it finds it's feet. The characters are no longer irritating and the story progresses well.
    People say it's the new Lost.. but this is more clear cut and definite. So don't let the comparisons put you off. This seems like it's much more cleverer and not making it
    Initially hated this show, gave it a 3 rating. I stuck with it due to running out of good shows to watch. After 5 eps I'd say it finds it's feet. The characters are no longer irritating and the story progresses well.
    People say it's the new Lost.. but this is more clear cut and definite. So don't let the comparisons put you off. This seems like it's much more cleverer and not making it up as they go along.
    Expand
  30. Aug 10, 2013
    3
    The series could have been so successful, but I never though it will turn out this bad! Under the Dome's only positive points are the fact that its premise is interesting and intriguing and that there are some interesting plot points that have appeared in what I have seen in the series. But sadly, the series is filled with utterly annoying and unlikable characters that are extremelyThe series could have been so successful, but I never though it will turn out this bad! Under the Dome's only positive points are the fact that its premise is interesting and intriguing and that there are some interesting plot points that have appeared in what I have seen in the series. But sadly, the series is filled with utterly annoying and unlikable characters that are extremely annoying and lack in any sort of logic. In television shows, audiences are supposed to care about the characters, but no care is given here. The dialogue is both corny and horrible and the CG is pretty damn terrible as well. As much as I wanted to continue watching the series, I kept getting constantly frustrated and annoying by the characters and there decisions and dialogue, the subplots and other things. A high concept drama gone wrong. Expand
Metascore
72

Generally favorable reviews - based on 35 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 28 out of 35
  2. Negative: 1 out of 35
  1. Reviewed by: Joanne Ostrow
    Jun 24, 2013
    80
    Not only is it creepy, suspenseful and full of splendid special effects, veteran actors and fresh young faces, but it's laced with big thoughts about environmentalism and the future of the planet.
  2. 70
    You don't immediately sense how all of the characters are connected or how they might eventually become connected--most of the pilot is scene-setting and mood-building--but what's onscreen is compelling.
  3. Reviewed by: Willa Paskin
    Jun 24, 2013
    70
    Based on just one episode, it’s hard to tell how the series will unfold, but the mood, threatening, uneasy, a little kinky, is there, and that just might be enough.