Kings

[and-justice-for-all]

I had been curious about this show and finally go around to looking it up...I figured it had some religious context just by the title, I was right. Seems to be a nod to Theocracy, just from a preview I just watched:

"Inspired by the biblical story of King David, this contemporary soap is about a typical small town guy who becomes involved with high society and politics and rises to the top against all odds.

Kings is produced by 3 Arts Entertainment in association with Universal Media Studios and distributed by the NBC Television Network. The series has been given a 13 episode initial order."

http://www.tv.com/kings/show/75338/summary.html?user_rating=40&rating_ref_type=101

[Exilednight]

1. I watched this show over the week and I have to say that I was semi-

impressed. It has a lot of potential, but the question is: will it live up to it?

My guess is, if it does it will be canceled; if it doesn't, then it will survive for five or six seasons and live on in reruns. After a few more episodes we will have a better gauge of where the show is going and how well it is doing.

[Duer 157099]

2. While I'm mildly curious, I want to preserve my image of McShane as Swearengen

Since it's network, I'll bet he's not saying "c*cksucker" every other word.

It's funny, when he was on The Daily Show last week, Jon tried to delicately broach that angle, but McShane refused to go there. Jon couldn't even tempt him.

Guess there's a new image to keep polished.

[Exilednight]

3. So here are my issues with this show ........

The show was a great concept, but poorly executed.

Other than Ian McShane and Eammon Walker, the acting is subpar at best. Sebastian Stan is growing into his role as Jack, but Eagon and Miller are sorely miscast as David and Michelle. David is especially out of his league. The scene where his brother dies, grabs the bloody sheet and walks out onto the battlefield is some the worst dramatic acting I have seen in quite a while.

The dialogue is far from Shakespeare. At times the writing shows flashes of brilliance, but it quickly fades before the next comma is even reached.

Samuel could be a very interesting character, but the writers are scared to push the boundaries. He comes up with the most basic of messages - like, "you're no longer God's favorite" - but I'd be more interested in seeing how God delivers those messages to the good reverend.

The two guards are the unfunny version of Abbot and Costello. What the hell is their purpose? Typically, two characters like this would be used to move the show from one story line to other, or as comic relief, but they don't even do that.

Here's the real problem with this show, anyone who has read the book of Samuel already knows what is going to happen. There isn't much deviation other than putting it in a modern time.

If you haven't read the book of Samuel, then there is a whole new problem with this show. The trick to writing this type of show is to give the viewer just enough to keep them interested (which this show does not), but not enough to give away the plot.

The plot is already laid out for them, all they need to do is make it interesting, and they're failing miserably.

They get an A+ for concept, but nothing higher than a C- for the rest. And the only reason I would give them a C- is due to Ian McShane.

Like I said: excellent concept, lousy execution.