SeriousChristian.org
The Bible on Television, 2009
Kings (nbc)
a Review by
Garry D. Nation
“People with destinies—things don't go well for them. They die old and unhappy, or young and unfinished.” – Mrs. Shepard
What if the nations of the modern world were ruled by kings and councils rather than presidents and parliaments—would there be any difference? And what if the legitimacy of a government should depend not only on the favor of the people, but also on the favor of God?
That is the premise of the new NBC series Kings, brought to us by the mind and pen of Michael Green, creator of the hit series Heroes. Kings transports us to a world of monarchs in business suits who broadcast their doings on television and rely on computer technology to administer their kingdoms.
Not just another fantasy
Like Heroes, Kings engages in a creative manipulation of reality. There is a difference, however, that sets Kings apart not only from Heroes, but also almost every other Sci-Fi/Fantasy program.
Most of these kinds of storylines occur in a monistic universe—i.e., all things that exist and all events that occur are expressions of one kind of reality, one nature, in a closed-system universe. The stories may bend, stretch, and exaggerate reality, but they do not violate the tenets of a modern humanistic worldview. They may invent new mythologies, but their myths are humanistic.
The universe of Kings, however, more closely reflects the worldview (not necessarily the inspired point of view) of the writers of the Bible. In does so by the re-telling of a biblical story—the story of how David became king.
Most of the events that move the plot occur within the natural course of things. The political and personal intrigues rival those of 24 and The West Wing. There is, however, a hidden actor in the events of the drama, who is occasionally discussed and described in the script but who never actually appears onscreen. That one’s input and activity, though inscrutable, comes into play at unexpected but crucial times. And in this series they dare to call that unseen figure “God.”
Don’t misunderstand. This is not a “religious” TV show. And although the storyline is based on the “David” story of the Bible, it does not strain itself into a point-by-point regurgitation. (Actually, when I first tuned in I feared that is what it would be, worried that it could get really cheesy.) Still, the points of comparison are clearly set out and plain to see.
Characters—true, but different
The background is that Silas Benjamin (Saul) rules over the newly-united Kingdom of Gilead (Israel, re-conceived as a multi-ethnic society), which he forged a generation earlier. King Silas leads a nation that is locked in perpetual conflict with the neighboring, militaristic kingdom of Gath (the Philistines).
In the pilot episode a young army officer named David Shepard (David, the shepherd) leads a daring and forbidden raid to rescue the king’s son Jack (Jonathan) from enemy hands. In the process he stands against and defeats the most feared weapon in the arsenal of Gath—the Goliath super battle tank. The victory wins David national celebrity, a promotion, an appointment to the king’s personal staff, and the increasingly bitter jealousy and secret enmity of the king’s son.
That’s right. Jack Benjamin is no great-hearted Jonathan. The friendship he gives to David is deceitful and conspiratorial. In Kings he is a conniving, unscrupulous, J. R. Ewing-type of character. This is your first big clue that something is different, and that some of the characters have changed (not always for the better) by being transferred from the Bible into the modern world. It seems appropriate, for since Michael Green has altered our contemporary universe in order to accommodate a Bible story, some of his characters have must also been altered by a modern world.
Not all, however. Certain key characters seem to me to be dead-on accurate in the way they flesh out the very human characters of the Bible, with all their mixture of virtues and flaws.
One of these is Silas Benjamin, as played by veteran actor Ian McShane (he played Judas in the Franco Zeferelli production Jesus of Nazareth). King Silas is a larger-than-life, Nixonian figure. He is a king who once believed in the divine anointing, but it has become to him a thing in his past, an illusive memory he still fondly recalls, but of which he has lost the reality. Whatever he does, he seems unable to please the nation’s highly regarded spiritual leader, the Rev. Samuels (the prophet Samuel, played by African-American actor Eamonn Walker), whose unbending moral absolutism continually collides with Silas’s ruthless political pragmatism.
It is of course on the character of David Shepard that the story must turn, and that is the “hat trick” on which the success of the whole series hangs. If David’s character does not ring true, then the concept for the whole series falls apart. Here is the heart of the story, raising the crucial question: Are there any good guys left, and if so, how would we know? It would be easy, and fatal, to idealize David as always good, always confident, always competent. It would be equally easy and fatal to go the cynical route.
David Shepard (actor Chris Egan, who bears an uncanny resemblance to the late Heath Ledger) is idealistic and naïve. He is not a goody-two-shoes, but other characters do look at him that way, and he is publicly presented that way by the shameless royal publicity machine. David, however, views his victory against the Goliath very differently from the way everyone else saw it go down, and does not see himself as a hero. He does not always know all the answers, but resourcefully seems to come up with the right thing to say and do at the given time—as though he is “blessed.” He is innocently unaware of the intrigue swirling all around him, and knows only that he feels uncomfortable in the position he’s been placed in. His support of the king puts him at odds with his own family, who see him as a sellout. His faith in God is not unwavering, and he has many doubts.
Yet despite the fact that the people around him are trying either to use him or to undo him, David does support the king wholeheartedly, and honestly admires him as he leader of his nation. He is not perfect and sometimes makes the wrong choice, but he acts out of a core of integrity—a quality that is most irritating to Jack Benjamin, of whose rivalry David is abstractly unaware.
What is manifest is that David is a chosen one, and divine favor is with him. King Silas knows it, and the Rev. Samuels knows it, and so does almost everyone else—but David as yet does not. On that tension does much of the plot revolve.
The plot is complex and the subplots are many, and involve numerous characters. Some of them have a biblical counterpart: the king’s daughter Michelle/Michal (Allison Miller), who is strongly attracted to David, though her mother and father have other ideas; Gen. Abner (American Indian actor Wes Studi, whose intensity is scary—and he hasn’t really had anything to do yet), who is completely loyal to King Silas—or is he? But there are many other characters that do not have a biblical counterpart: Queen Rose Benjamin (Susanna Thompson), who wields her own brand of power within the royal household; the queen’s brother, financier William Cross (a weasely Dylan Baker); the displaced and imprisoned King Vesper (Brian Cox, who plays him like a caged bear); and newly introduced as the queen’s nephew, Andrew Cross (Macaulay Culkin, dressed in black and very creepy), just brought back from exile—we don’t yet know why; and many others.
A Theistic worldview—not necessarily religious or inspirational
To me the most intriguing aspect of Kings is the respectful presentation of a truly theistic worldview. There is an underlying recognition of a reality above nature (the philosophical term is metaphysical dualism), and it is done without a trace of irony. This is not the first program on TV to do this. Touched by an Angel comes to mind, as does tnt’s Saving Grace, but these shows present the supernatural in the context of the individual. Some would say that the abc series Lost presents such a worldview, but it does so in a cryptic, quasi-allegorical manner.
Kings, on the other hand, displays an unembarrassed portrayal of God as an active agent in human affairs—and manages to do so without being religiously obtrusive or preachy. God is not personified—we don’t have Morgan Freeman dressed in white to represent him. Neither is God subjectivized into a feeling of spirituality. Series creator Green is clearly exploring the theme of divine interaction with humanity in terms of the ordinary and common realities of life. If a personal-infinite God (the God of the Bible) does exist, what would his activity in human affairs look like? Green is bold enough to ask the question from the Bible itself rather than some religious tradition. I think his reading is not only fresh, it is essentially true to the source material.
For example, in one segment King Silas’s political enemies have been invited to a clandestine meeting to discuss his overthrow. Rev. Samuels has also been invited to the meeting, not knowing its import. None of the participants know that the meeting was arranged by King Silas himself in order to draw out traitors and assassinate them. As he drives to the meeting, Rev. Samuels looks skyward to see an unusual sight: the wind is blowing smoke from a stack in one direction, but a flag next to the stack is flying the opposite direction. Samuels takes it as a sign of alarm, turns his car around, and dodges a violent death. It is apparently a divine intervention—not an intrusion, but an interposition, a participation, objectively observable, yet seen and understood only by eyes of faith.
At least that’s the way I read it. Maybe someone else may see it another way. It’s possible that only those with eyes of faith will find enough here to stay interested in the story, that there won’t be enough of them to keep the series alive—but I hope otherwise. I would like to see how this story plays out this season and at least one more. So far the series is having a hard time finding viewers. The network has pulled it from the schedule until June. Perhaps in the summer it will be able to build enough of an audience to bring it back, if not in the fall season then in January 2010. Judging from the blogs, those who have watched it are enthusiastic about it.
As for me, I find Kings engaging, refreshing, and illuminating, not in a religiously “inspirational” way, but as a dramatic examination of the relation between power, morality, and faith.
View show information, clips, and full episodes online here:
