Ask Matt: Streaming ‘Jeopardy!,’ Goode Times, Early Exits & 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, it’s the most frequent complaint, but there’s always closed-captioning. Check out this story for more tips.)
One caution: This is a spoiler-free zone, so we won’t be addressing upcoming storylines here unless it’s already common knowledge. Please send your questions and comments to [email protected]. Look for Ask Matt columns on most Tuesdays.
Jeopardy‘s New Streaming Homes
Question: Do you find it interesting that the Jeopardy! (and Wheel of Fortune) streaming rights went to Peacock and Hulu, and that Amazon having the Pop Culture version on Prime Video didn’t give them a leg up in getting the original recipe version? I suppose Pop Culture is a different show. But given that we haven’t heard anything about a renewal of it, I do wonder if they’ll want to continue a spinoff of something that will be streaming on a competing service. Pop Culture is the only version I don’t enjoy, so I don’t really mind. But I did find it interesting that they went elsewhere despite already having a relationship with Amazon. — Jake
Matt Roush: Jeopardy and Wheel also have a relationship with Hulu, given that their prime-time celebrity versions, as well as Jeopardy! Masters, all stream on Hulu after their ABC premieres. So that made sense to me. I’m not sure where Peacock factors into the picture, although from Sony Pictures Television’s POV, the more the merrier, I guess, in this experiment in seeing how next-day distribution of new episodes fares on the streamers. If there’s a new season of Pop Culture Jeopardy! (no word yet), I’d expect that will remain on Prime Video, given the mindset of the Jeopardy! powers that be, that exposure on a multitude of platforms is a good thing for the franchise. Having the episodes available the next day will likely be a boon for those who can’t record the episodes or who are frustrated when sports and/or news interruptions pre-empt the original airing.
Why Do So Many Network Shows End Early?
Question: I know the answer to all questions is money, which is why I find this a bit confusing. Why do so many shows end before May sweeps, specifically a show like Abbott Elementary? Wouldn’t having a solid rating during May lead to more money for the stations? Are they afraid of a low rating and trying to protect the shows that end in April somehow? Aside from the Dick Wolf universe and a couple of others, there were hardly any new episodes of TV in May. — Rob
Matt Roush: The concept of sweeps (traditionally in November, February and May) was always something of an artificial construct, and while they still apparently exist to some degree primarily on behalf of local news and TV stations, it no longer drives TV development or scheduling on a network level. The same reasoning applies to the “traditional” TV season from September to May. While the networks have given up lately on scheduling anything scripted during the summer months, the old days of dozens of new shows flooding the lineups in September are over.
Series now premiere at all times of the year, and because the economics of the business (yes, money) are increasingly challenging, including production costs, we’re seeing many shows produce fewer episodes. Or even, like Abbott Elementary, when they produce what is now considered a full season of 22 episodes as they did this year, the tendency is to air them straight through with minimal interruptions or repeats, which often means ending their seasons early. For every complaint I hear about shows signing off before May, the outcry is even greater when they flip between new episodes and repeats every few weeks to try to stretch out the season.
The Goode, the Bad and the Rarely Ugly
Comment: I have several times in the past written about particular actors who cause a negative visceral reaction in me. On the other hand, there is Matthew Goode. I never had a strong reaction to him, but I have usually found him too conceitedly smug to like him very much. So what a refreshing surprise was Dept. Q on Netflix! This is the type of role he should be playing more often. What a beautiful piece of acting. I was riveted by his performance throughout all nine episodes. I hope he’ll stop playing the good-guy Jane Austen-type roles and seek more interesting parts like this one. Just about everything about Dept. Q is great: writing, directing, acting, etc. The whole supporting cast is outstanding, though I would give particular notice to Alexej Manvelov as Akram Salim. — D.P.
Matt Roush: Oh, the curse of a handsome leading man! And more to the point, the joys of watching an actor be cast successfully against type, as Goode is as detective Carl Morck in this riveting mystery series. (I decided not to binge this one, and we’re enjoying it in nightly increments — though we took a break over the weekend for the French Open finals and the Tony Awards.) Agreed about Manvelov as the outwardly polite Syrian refugee sidekick who’s such a contrast with the recklessly abrasive Morck. Watching Goode sink his teeth into this character is a delight, though I’ve never had an issue with his more reserved cool when playing romantic heroes or cads. Or, as in A Discovery of Witches, a swoon-worthy centuries-old vampire.
A Caan-Do TV Star
Question: I just read that Alert: Missing Persons Unit has been canceled, along with The Cleaning Lady. This saddens me as I have enjoyed both programs, and I’m betting their replacements will not be anywhere as good. That complaint aside, I found Scott Caan fun in both Hawaii Five-0 and Alert, but Danno and Jason seem to be the same person. My question: Is his acting range that limited, or was Jason deliberately fashioned after Danny? — Chris D.
Matt Roush: This isn’t an issue of range as much as an observation that characters like these in procedural dramas tend to be cut from a pretty standard pattern, and both of these guys play to Scott Caan’s personality, or at least what we’ve seen on TV. It would be interesting to see him play someone a little less cocky, or as Goode is doing in Dept. Q, inhabiting the role of someone you’d probably hate on first sight.
A Sweet Memorial
Comment: I just finished watching this season of Mid-Century Modern on Hulu and wanted to give a shoutout to how well the show handled Linda Lavin‘s unexpected passing. The episode where her character passed away was a lovely tribute to the actress and the character, and the cast did an amazing job. Both Linda Lavin and Sybil Schneiderman will be missed. — Debbie
Matt Roush: It’s always good to be reminded that people discover streaming series on their own timetable, and I’m betting that as more people watch this affectionately broad comedy (which dropped the entire season at the end of March), more people will savor Linda Lavin’s last great role. I include this here because I’m beating the drums for her as loudly as I can in hopes that the Emmy voters will remember and reward her with a posthumous nomination.
A Pitch from Beyond the Pond
Question: I think I am onto something. I’ve got an idea for a TV show. Hear me out: We meet Emma, a twenty-something, fresh out of college, navigating her life with a bunch of friends and roommates in the village in NYC. Sounds familiar? That’s because it’s a sequel of sorts. At the end of the pilot, where Emma settles into her new rented apartment, we see Emma facetiming her mom, and the role is played by Jennifer Aniston and you think: Oh cool, her mom’s being played by Jennifer, but then Emma facetimes her brother, Ben, and then her dad, played by David Schwimmer. So at the end of the very first episode, we see her signing her apartment lease, and we finally get to see her surname on her signature: she is Emma Green-Geller. Boom!
So this is Rachel and Ross’s kid, and we are talking about a sitcom where Emma’s parents’ gang pops in from time to time (she could for example facetime them all and we see Aunt Monica and her off-camera Uncle Chandler) and she could have relationships with her grandpa Elliot Gould’s cousins, Jack and Erica, the children Monica and Chandler adopted in later seasons. (Or Jack and Erica are part of the gang as well as Ben and Emma, and Ben and Emma have a mirror relationship like the one Monica and Ross had). This could revamp NBC‘s Thursday lineup, and during Upfronts, press and investors would need to sign an NDA. The moment the pilot airs, we have a bombshell moment à la the This Is Us pilot episode, and the internet is set on fire. What do you think? — Carlo, Amsterdam
Matt Roush: I’m sure there’s I.P. (intellectual property) value in a Friends: The Next Generation sitcom, and my only argument against your pitch from across the ocean is that I doubt any programming exec would want to keep the premise under wraps until after the pilot airs. More likely, the family connection with Rachel and Ross would be one of the first things you’d see in establishing Emma’s character, with the others in the gang building from there (also with callbacks to their iconic parents, seen or not seen). I like the idea of surprise — the twists in the Modern Family pilot (revealing they’re all members of the same family) and the This Is Us pilot (that they’re all siblings) are historic — but when dealing with such a well-known franchise, this sort of stunt might backfire. And there’s always the danger of living up to expectations with a property as beloved as Friends, as well as the reality that the “must-see” days of network TV are largely a distant memory.
And Finally …
Question: I find it amazing how tech people on shows like Tracker and Law & Order seem to have complete access to everyone’s private information with just a few clicks on their computer. What is the connection between these shows and reality? — Taylor F.
Matt Roush: You should be amazed, because even with technology’s advancements, these sorts of background checks and online investigations take time to do well and accurately (or so I’m led to believe, even in our new age of A.I.) — but because time is of a premium in this sort of procedural storytelling, the process is sped up to keep the story moving. We’ve been suspending disbelief for at least as long as the glory days of CSI, which turned forensic investigators into magicians.
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]. (Please include a first name with your question.)
Alert: Missing Persons Unit where to stream
Watchlist Easy access to only the shows you care about — all in one simple place
Alerts Only important notifications — when a show is returning, when it becomes available to stream, and more.
Special Offers Exclusive products we release related to your favorite shows and streaming services