Ask Matt: Network TV’s Franchise and Procedural Glut, ‘S.W.A.T.’ Renewal & 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.

Are TV Franchises Edging Out Originality?

Question: With the demise of Magnum P.I. and Quantum Leap, I’m left to wonder why does it seem like the shows that are creative, fun, and different get the boot while we are left with the same procedural franchises of Law & Order, Chicago Fire/Med/PD, NCIS, and others. And we wonder why network TV is so boring — it’s the same six or 10 shows to choose from! Where is the originality? Magnum P.I. was lighthearted and fun, and Quantum Leap was creative — both of them outside the routine hospital, cop/law enforcement, fire shows that every network has. Thank goodness for Ghosts or there would be nothing left on broadcast TV for me. — Sharon B., Youngstown, Ohio

Matt Roush: Might I suggest you stay tuned to CBS after Ghosts on most Thursdays to sample So Help Me Todd and especially Elsbeth, which veer toward the “lighthearted and fun” tone you seem to enjoy. They’re not as action-oriented as the Magnum reboot, but they’re also not a clone of three other shows unlike so much else of what populates prime-time network TV. (ABC’s Will Trent also fits the category with its quirky lead.) To your bigger point, much of network TV is basically in survival mode these days, which means playing it safe and doubling (or tripling) down on what they know works, which is franchise procedurals. This is how we get full nights of FBI (Tuesday), Chicago you-name-it (Wednesday), and Law & Order (Thursday), all not so coincidentally from the Dick Wolf factory. You don’t need a streaming algorithm to understand the formula that nothing succeeds like excess—even at the risk of making most network fare seem interchangeable and unsurprising.

Drowning in Procedurals

Question: I think I am the only TV viewer who does not appreciate the amount of episodic procedural shows in this TV season. To name a few, there’s something like five NCIS shows (including the two in development), the FBI trio, the Law & Order trio, Tracker, Will Trent, The Irrational, and even more. I’m excited when a new series or pilot is ordered, but then I discover it’s ANOTHER new procedural that only has one tiny “twist” to make it seem new and refreshing. (For example, The Irrational is a generic procedural show with new cases every week, but here’s the twist: He was in an explosion and he wants to discover who did it!)

Is it just me who finds the repetition of all these episodic procedural shows with a “twist” annoying? Where’s the fresh, interesting, serialized dramas? If you want a good detective show, include one huge case throughout the season but continue adding in fresh new elements. (For example, ABC’s Big Sky was set in a unique location, had one thrilling and exciting case, and introduced new elements every season.) Why do non-episodic shows like Big Sky and gone-too-soon The Company You Keep underperform in comparison to the HUGE amount of procedurals? Are other TV viewers not sick of new cases every episode? What’s your opinion on the matter? Episodic procedurals or serialized storytelling? — Shirley

Matt Roush: My wish would be for a healthy mix of both types of TV. I wouldn’t want every show to be so serialized I’d have to worry about missing an episode or having to consult a flow chart to keep track of who’s doing what to whom. And many of the franchise procedurals feature serialized storylines, some of them soap opera-adjacent but sometimes dealing with cases that extend over multiple episodes. Still, I get the despair regarding the preponderance of formulaic franchises that, as discussed in the previous question, are now filling entire nights of programming, belying the notion that variety is the spice of life. (And yes, I miss variety shows.) You’re obviously not alone, because while these procedurals are among the higher-rated shows on broadcast networks, those ratings aren’t what they used to be, given that many viewers—especially younger ones, who might only know the NBC chime from playing clips of Saturday Night Live online—have cut the cord and abandoned traditional linear TV because it’s so irrelevant to their tastes and viewing patterns.

Also factor in that whenever one of these conglomerate studio/streaming companies develop something interesting and out of the norm, they tend to put it on one of their streaming platforms (Peacock, Paramount+, Hulu), reinforcing the notion that very little that’s creative, risky or stimulating will ever be scheduled on their broadcast platform. (It took a strike to get episodes of Only Murders in the Building to air on ABC.) The quick fade of shows like The Company They Keep and Big Sky (which were flawed, but had great promise and, as Shirley notes, were at least different) can be chalked up to the precarious economics of network TV, where the axe will fall quickly if a show doesn’t appear to have legs. And if a heavily serialized show doesn’t start off strong, the likelihood of its audience growing is usually seen as a long shot. Ergo: cancellation. Not a pretty picture.

Hope Springs Eternal

Question: With the announcement about CBS renewing S.W.A.T., reversing its cancellation, can we hope that the powers to be will have Blue Bloods follow suit? — Geno

Matt Roush: We can always hope, but you’ll probably need to be more patient and keep your expectations in check. CBS won’t have to make such a decision on Blue Bloods until much later this year, because the current (and reportedly final) Season 14 is being split in two parts, with the final episodes airing in the fall. There are other differences as well, most notably that Blue Bloods is much farther along in its run than S.W.A.T., which got an unexpected reprieve and a Season 8 pickup after negotiations with the studio that are above my pay grade to parse, but often have to do with license fees and number of episodes produced. It was widely reported that Blue Bloods’ cast and producers took a 25 percent pay cut to secure this 14^th season in a year when several shows underwent cost-cutting measures to keep the lights on. As with S.W.A.T., the sustained popularity of Blue Bloods on Friday nights could give the network and the show’s producers incentive to make another deal that would go beyond Season 14, but for now, we should prepare as they are for a graceful and hopefully honorable exit.

Night Manager Back in Business

Question: What do you make of the news that The Night Manager is being revived for two more seasons? I really liked that show — I probably watched it because you recommended it — but the miniseries (which I suppose is now retroactively Season 1) felt complete to me. It aired all the way back in 2016. To be honest, I haven’t really thought about it that much in the eight-year interim. I remember it fondly — or, to be more specific, I thought “Oh yeah, I liked that show” when I read that it was coming back. But I don’t remember specifics because I watched it live when it aired and not since. I’d have to watch the miniseries again in order to recall it with more than just a general feeling of approval. What do you think about this? Will fans even remember it when it comes back? And do you think this is more than just resurrecting an old piece of IP because it did well last time? — Jake

Matt Roush: I’m not as skeptical as you are. For Prime Video (in partnership with BBC for the revival), which has done well by adaptations of popular books (Bosch, Jack Ryan, Reacher), this makes sense regardless of how much time has passed since the original, which was complete in its telling of the original story. The revived Night Manager is, from what I can tell, going to tell entirely new stories built around the title character, once again played by a major star (Tom Hiddleston) and building on the following of a huge literary name (John le Carré). The challenge will be, as always, living up to the original series, which featured an incredible supporting cast including Hugh Laurie, Olivia Colman, Tom Hollander, and Elizabeth Debicki. This was one of my favorite programs of 2016, and if streamers are going to lean on IP (pre-existing intellectual property), this at least is a title I believe in.

Down Memory Lane, and the Future of Organized Crime

Question: You are such a blast from the past for me. I used to write to you years ago after reading my daily edition of USA TODAY. I remember writing about Designing Women, the firing of Delta Burke and I think Life With Lucy — or that might have been before your time. I loved Lucy, but they gave her a weak show with awful supporting players and what they should have done was given her a Golden Girls type of show with a girlfriend. No grandchildren! The last episode they aired with Audrey Meadows was actually pretty good.

Anyway, can you tell me why NBC has renewed Law & Order and SVU but not Organized Crime? I love OC and think the ensemble cast is great. — Chris S., Bellport, N.Y.

Matt Roush: Wow, thanks for the nostalgia trip. (For the record, the sad debacle that was Life with Lucy was just before my time on the TV beat, though I was at USA TODAY, but not yet in my dream job.) To address Organized Crime, the reason its future is most likely in limbo—“still in discussion,” was how NBC put it—is because of the three Law & Order shows, it’s said to be the lowest rated, hardly a surprise since the latest show in the lineup (in the 10 pm/9c hour) is usually the least watched. Some industry observers point to its rotation of showrunners, suggesting OC is not the smoothest running show in Dick Wolf world. But from a less granular standpoint, it could be that it’s just one of several “on the bubble” shows whose fate could be determined by NBC’s needs for next season, and the network is weighing its options before giving it the green light. This wouldn’t be the first Law & Order show to be canceled—even the mothership took a decade-long hiatus—but the good news is it’s not officially canceled yet and could return for a full or (if sharing the time period) possibly shortened fifth season.

And Finally …

Question: I have been waiting two years for the period drama Victoria to return to Masterpiece on PBS. Do you know if it will ever come back for another season and continue with the history after the death of Prince Albert? As a person that enjoys the costume drama period pieces, I was looking forward to seeing the history of Queen Victoria who wore mourning black for the rest of her life and reign. — Jamie H.

Matt Roush: It’s actually been quite a bit more than two years since Season 3 of Victoria aired in 2019. Though it was apparently always the intention for the series to take a break before resuming, after all this time it seems more and more unlikely. Reports from British media in 2021 quoted producing network ITV as confirming there were no “active plans” for a fourth season, while not ruling out that it would ever happen. Until such an announcement is made, consider Victoria to be history for now.

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.)