Petron in this whole series. Or there is, but he's almost completely ignored. This show needed less secularism, for one thing. I cant believe how many reviews this show got as positive. You go through every review before myself and only 3 of them will say they hated it. It looked great, it seemed to struggle to catch on, but... it was just bad. the source material was not there, they made up fake events, could've had a real Goliath...and Jonathan (or JACK)...was actually gay on the show, but he wasn't in the Bible, so...not even a little okay...that's not who he really was... i'm glad this didn't go very far... if you disagree with me, that's fine, but this is one of the few shows where i'll tell people how blatantly wrong they are. swear all you want, you're just wrong. and there's nothing you can do except try to explain back because it's the internet. however if you agree...please hold on to that...please...is there anyone sane left in the world, besides me... All in all, reasons why it was bad A. left the good source material, B. David was completely different C. Romeo and Juliet story added (for no good reason D. JONATHAN turned to be gay, just to knock for the secular audience. There's a reason the episodes of that one season were put out on Hulu after so many years, they don't do that with good shows. And E. They showed little faith in God-- only for certain things --and more faith in themselves, which was stupid because that's like in most movies, if this show gets rebooted i would't care what people say as long as it would just STICK TO THE source. Films now like Noah, so stupid just because the producers and directors and writers always are gonna try to apply more to the secular mindset. But i guess that's just the way the world is. Nothing left to do except to just warn people about it.

rlandmann "Kings" is set in an alternate-reality version of today; that is, the societies depicted have technology, architecture, and fashion indistinguishable from modern Western nations, but the states themselves (Gilboa and Gath) are fictional. The storyline takes its basic shape from the Biblical story of the rise of King David, echoing many of the names and narrative functions of characters from the ancient text. This is not a retelling: it's a reuse of structure. However, I don't think anything was made of this potential."Kings" is a good-looking show: most of its elements, taken individually, are very competently executed. Sets, costumes, and photography are all lovely, and the performances are convincing and sincere. However, compared to its source material, "Kings" is astonishingly tame and bland. Fatally, when the character of the King is so very toned down, it's not clear what the point is. Even regarded on its own terms, the stakes seem so very small and soap-operaesque. The battle sequences in the pilot episode are a microcosm of this: ludicrous in their tiny scale and nonsensical action. Armies are represented by half-a-dozen guys per side, deployed a couple of hundred metres apart. Imagine a low-budget 1970s BBC historical drama, but with state-of-the-art visuals.The theme of leadership going bad and questions of holding and losing the mandate to rule are timeless and powerful. It's astonishing to me how little "Kings" managed to do with this.

copperncherrio Overview: A parallel to the biblical story David and Goliath, this powerful cast highlights the political drama in this modern monarchy. There is only one season, but lots of drama involving the king and his family and of course David, an awarded soldier slowly rising to higher power.Review after finishing series: The main reason I dislike this show was that it's pace was too slow, but the show had quite a high production value. The actors and costumes were top notch. The build up is slow and I had no reason to come back. However, if you are into political dramas with little heart this is one season you can blow your time on.

cindi-roberts This is not what I expected when I started watching this show. While I can see the religious parallels, it is not heavy handed or preachy. It is a compelling character and relationship driven show with the added benefit of giving us a glimpse into the intricacies of royalty (albeit fictional royalty with substantial issues every week). While some of the story lines are more interesting than others, none are outright boring to watch. Elements of Kings have the feel of 80s dramas like Dallas and Dynasty but done in a classier way with far more complexity. The characters are cast with the perfect actors and developed enough to get my emotional attention. I find myself rooting for and against different relationships. Definitely worth the investment to watch it. Great show!