Ask Matt: Why Stream an ‘NCIS’ Spinoff? Plus ‘Grey’s, Streaming Bloat, ‘Ghosts’ & More
Welcome to the Q&A with TV critic — also known to some TV fans as their “TV therapist” — Matt Roush, who’ll try to address whatever you love, loathe, are confused or frustrated or thrilled by in today’s vast TV landscape. (We know background music is too loud, but there’s always closed-captioning.)
One caution: This is a spoiler-free zone, so we won’t be addressing upcoming storylines or developments here unless it’s already common knowledge. Please send your questions and comments to [email protected]. Look for Ask Matt columns on most Tuesdays.
Why Aren’t Tony and Ziva Heading Back to CBS?
Question: I was excited to learn about a spinoff of NCIS featuring the returns of Tony (Michael Weatherly) and Ziva (Cote de Pablo) but was sorry to hear that the show will air not on CBS but on the Paramount+ streaming platform. Why are they doing this? Fans who don’t stream will be so disappointed. — Jeannie
Matt Roush: This is how CBS President and CEO George Cheeks explained it to Vulture’s “Buffering” columnist Joe Adalian in a must-read interview: “We also announced NCIS: Origins, which is going to be on CBS. The Weatherly project really felt more like a serialized streaming show, and also was an example of us trying to expand the aperture of NCIS, which is what we did with Criminal Minds on Paramount+ (with Evolution). The whole goal here is to look at each potential creative execution and figure out where we think it ultimately should land. We had two really fantastic NCIS franchise extension ideas. One felt really right for broadcast, and one felt like a serialized streaming 10-or-13-episode idea.” Cheeks also pointed out that NCIS: Sydney had originally been developed as a streaming exclusive and only aired on CBS when the strikes left holes on the fall schedule.
Viewers who either can’t (for economic reasons) or won’t embrace streaming are always going to be disappointed when something they want to see goes behind a paywall, but even given the growing pains of many of these platforms, this is where these companies see the future (if not the present) of the industry. So this is hardly going to be an isolated situation.
Baby Deja Vu
Comment: A few seasons ago on Grey’s Anatomy, Jo decided to adopt Luna, the daughter of a patient whose life she was unable to save. On the final-season premiere of its spinoff Station 19, Maya and Carina decided to adopt the daughter of a pregnant woman from last season’s finale who did not survive that episode. I’m grateful to have the writers back at work and to have the shows back on the air. But does anybody over there realize that they are literally repeating the exact same story they already did? (Not to mention Bailey also decided to adopt a homeless kid who Ben came into contact with during the course of his work at the station, who then became Bailey’s patient during one of the crossovers. At least their kid is a teenager, but still.) — Jake
Matt Roush: And while we’re on the subject of ABC medical dramas, let’s not forget adopted baby Eden on The Good Doctor, on whose behalf Dr. Reznick (Fiona Gubelmann) is currently seeking to name a guardian. Storylines overlapping this obviously and frequently can seem ridiculous from a macro perspective, but it may just be inevitable in the soap-opera genre when writers are cranking out material for so many characters over so many seasons, and going to the nursery is an easy way to breathe new life into old relationships. Even when it’s been done seemingly to death.
What’s on NBC’s Bubble?
Question: With the immense amount of new NBC series orders and pilots (The Hunting Party, St. Denis Medical, Suits: LA, Grosse Pointe Garden Society, Reba’s Place, Dr. Wolf), they’re bound to do some canceling of their existing programming, right? If so, what do you think is getting the axe? It seems pretty clear to me that Quantum Leap won’t be getting another run, as ratings have declined since Season 1 and it seems like it costs a lot of money to make. In my eyes, Law & Order: SVU, The Irrational, and Found are the only 100% safe shows (the latter two only because they got renewals already), and I’m guessing the remainder of the Dick Wolf shows are safe for now. As for comedy, I really don’t know what to think. If I were in control, I’d cancel all three of their existing comedy shows (Night Court, Lopez vs Lopez, Extended Family) and bring back American Auto and Grand Crew. (Both of those were hilarious and were gone way too soon.) But since I’m not an NBC executive, I can’t do that, but if I had to guess, I’d say Night Court is the only one with a chance of a renewal.
Once upon a time a few years ago, NBC was the network for comedies (The Office, Parks & Rec, 30 Rock, Superstore, The Good Place, etc.) and now it’s home to (in my opinion) cheap multi-cam family comedies. It surprised me that any of these shows got renewals, let alone greenlights. But if NBC needs to make room for its new comedies, which will be the one to go? I’d guess Extended Family or Lopez vs Lopez, but really, all of them seem like possible options. What do you think is getting the axe?
Bonus question: Is there a possibility for a comeback for American Auto? I feel like it was so funny and yet so unappreciated. — Shirley
Matt Roush: Here we go for another round of Backseat Programmer. If all of the shows in NBC’s pipeline do end up on air, one way to make room for them is the new trend of shorter episode orders and the sharing of time periods. But yes, something’s got to give, and there’s not a lot of available real estate, given that Wednesdays and Thursdays are filled with Dick Wolf’s Chicago and Law & Order shows, and there’s no sign that this domination is going away anytime soon. Which leaves Mondays after The Voice, Tuesdays, possibly an hour on Friday before Dateline and Sundays after football. Your reasoning makes sense regarding Quantum Leap, but I hate to think they’ll yank it without providing some sort of wrap-up (the way they did the more preposterous La Brea). Having been a witness to NBC’s comedy history back in the heyday of Cheers, Frasier, Seinfeld, Friends, and other classics, I can’t argue with your assessment of the network’s current feeble stabs at comedy and would welcome an overhaul. That said, the ship has apparently sailed for good on the underrated American Auto. That might have been a better prospect for Peacock, but even they let Girls5eva get away to Netflix.
Why Don’t Streaming Series Cut to the Chase?
Comment: A major frustration I have with limited series on any streaming service is how much they excessively pad out what is essentially the concept for a two-hour movie or maybe a four-hour miniseries. Episodes that go on forever or stand-alone episodes about absolutely nothing or episodes where the characters just dialogue back-and-forth about nothing — it’s very self-indulgent of the writers and just wasting everyone’s time. I mean if you don’t have the goods for a proper 10-episode series, then don’t bother. I know it’s not trendy to praise broadcast dramas, but they crank through a 40-minute episode for like 22-episodes with such gusto. Recent examples included Death and Other Details (how bored I was for a genre I love so much) and Expats (what was with that 1 1/2 hour stand-alone episode), but this is prevalent on a lot of past shows, too. Netflix is the worst with it and started this horrible trend. I saw your recent “Best of Mini-Series” list and thought I would have enjoyed a lot of these limited programs in a miniseries format.
Also while we’re at it: A six-episode series is not a series. It’s a miniseries or a limited series. Six episodes? Why even bother investing if you are waiting two years for the next six episodes. TV is becoming quite the complex world. — Jay
Matt Roush: Isn’t it, though? Here you are complaining about the bloat of streaming series while also lamenting shows that err on the side of brevity. Of the two, I’m more OK with six-episode seasons (or thereabouts) if the six episodes are terrific. (See the current season of Girls5eva.) British TV has long operated on this model, as in the original The Office, for one example, and all seasons of the UK version of Ghosts. I’m with you, though, when it comes to the bloat of many streaming series. (A key example this week is Palm Royale on Apple TV+, a slight comedy with an amazing cast that quickly wears out its welcome with episodes averaging a tiresome 50 minutes.) An epic miniseries (or limited series in current vernacular) like FX’s Shogun can sustain its length. But many can’t.
I’m hoping (which is my optimistic spirit) that with the reckoning and reported end of “peak TV” that the streamers in particular will ease up on this practice and start exercising economy not just in their budgets but also in the length of their projects, unless they’re truly deserving.
Popping the Pop-Up Bubble
Comment: My biggest pet peeve is not the sound issue, it’s the constant stream of pop-ups promoting other programs and the channel logos that appear on the screen, blocking the content of the shows. Some of these pop-ups occupy the lower half of the screen. When I am watching a program, I don’t need constant reminders about other programs, nor do I need to be reminded which channel or network is showing the program that I am watching. Not sure, but I think this started with the wizards at Discovery, then migrated to their other properties. It is extremely annoying! Your thoughts? — Laurie
Matt Roush: Not going to argue with you on this one, which has been a fairly common gripe especially during the glory days of cable TV. I’ve come to peace with the logo bugs on the corner of the screen, if they’re transparent and don’t block any of the action (or, worse, crowd out text material like credits and subtitles). But when a network clutters the screen with an animated logo or promo for another show, that is a real turnoff and I can’t imagine why they think they’re doing themselves any favors with that kind of distraction.
And Finally …
Question: After the recent twists in Ghosts, I went back and rewatched “Pete’s Wife,” the episode in Season 1 in which Carol first appears. This exchange caught my attention. Pete: “I just can’t believe I’m about to see my wife after all these years.” Flower: “Hey, who knows? Maybe she’ll drop dead while she’s here and become a ghost.” Pete: “Do you think that’s possible? She did suffer from hypertension even in her 40s.” Alberta: “Why are you trying to get his hopes up?” Flower: “Sorry.” Pete: “No, you’re right, you’re right. I’m just going to try to enjoy the day even if my wife doesn’t die.”
At the time I first watched it, I just thought this was a very funny exchange. Considering what is happening now, though, I’m wondering if the writers actually planned to kill Carol in the mansion eventually as far back as the first season. Of course, it was one of the early episodes, so they might not have had a renewal yet. But that would be a big coincidence if it wasn’t planned. — JL
Matt Roush: The storyline about Pete’s wife’s infidelity comes from the original UK series (where the scoutmaster is named Pat), so I’d be surprised if this was the original intent when that early episode aired. But those jokes may very well have planted the seed for this season’s delightful twist. It’s certainly fun to look back at it now from this perspective. And considering that the CBS version produces so many more episodes, I’m sure the writers are always looking for new ways to shake up the household on both sides of the living/ghost divide. All I know is that as long as they want to keep Caroline Aaron around as Carol, I’m on board.
That’s all for now. We can’t do this without your participation, so please keep sending questions and comments about TV to [email protected] or shoot me a line on X (formerly) Twitter @TVGMMattRoush. (Please include a first name with your question.)
