The very promising series Kings ended with a whimper, not a bang. Such is the fate of a show axed before its time.
In the same way that the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica was premised on the idea of eventually finding Earth, Kings was premised on the idea that David should eventually become king. Battlestar had a three hour miniseries, four seasons, and two "TV Movies" (one yet to be released) in which to find its destiny. Kings was likewise dependent on a longer arc.
Ending the show after one season was impossible to accomplish satisfactorily, and the audience was left unfulfilled. To do otherwise would have been like Mulder unraveling all the alien secrets at the end of the first X-Files season, or Dr. Kimble finding the one-armed man in the first season of The Fugitive -- it wouldn't leave anywhere else to go. So the show was left open-ended with the hope that it could resume at some later point. Perhaps so open-ended that the actors could age notably between seasons without breaking the plot.
There is some hope that SyFy (the mutated Sci Fi Channel, an NBC/Universal property) might pick up Kings with the idea that it "could fill the sucking vacuum left by Battlestar Galactica". (And let me tell you, that is quite a sucking vacuum indeed.) This would probably be a good idea, but I'm not holding my breath.
Despite my problems with the finale, the show had real potential, and I'll miss it. I thoroughly enjoyed it right up until the penultimate episode, and even then I still thought it was one of the better things on television. Well, up until the last scene between Silas and David, which was quite awkward and forced. But I blame that on NBC moreso than the writers.
Remind me again why this show didn't catch?