Ask Matt: Canceling the Young ‘Dexter,’ Cringeworthy Love Triangles & 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.
Goodbye, Original Sin; Good Riddance, Waterfront
Question: I was hoping to get your thoughts on the recent cancellation of Dexter: Original Sin. Despite its initial success and a Season 2 renewal just months ago, Paramount abruptly pulled the plug. The show had a strong start, with compelling writing, a gripping tone, and standout performances—particularly Sarah Michelle Gellar‘s return to television and the addition of Christian Slater to the cast. It seemed like a promising direction for the franchise.
What puzzles me is why Dexter: Resurrection, a sequel continuing the story with Michael C. Hall, was greenlit instead of Original Sin, which I personally found superior in every way. After the horrendous finale of the original Dexter series, I’ve sworn off sequels to that story — I simply cannot forgive the creators and writers for how it ended. I’m fine exploring prequels, like Original Sin, but I won’t dive into sequels that revisit that original narrative. What do you think led to this decision?
Regarding another cancellation: Netflix recently canceled The Waterfront after one season, and frankly, I’m relieved. I found it confusing, boring, and, for a soap-style drama, utterly uninspired — especially coming from Kevin Williamson, who gave us Dawson’s Creek. It made me wonder: How does a show like this even get greenlit in a landscape so crowded with content? With the sheer volume of shows we’re exposed to — on network TV, cable, and all the streaming platforms — it feels impossible to keep up. So when a series that doesn’t quite hit the mark is canceled quickly, it almost feels like a blessing in disguise. I’d love to hear your perspective on this. Is The Waterfront just a rare misfire from a veteran creator, or does its quick demise reflect broader trends in how streaming platforms are curating content in an age of “too much TV?” — Hector
Matt Roush: Let’s start with Dexter, the much more interesting show. While I wasn’t as big a fan of Original Sin as Hector — I found most aspects of the execution to be too overheated, and not just because of the Miami climate — I appreciated getting the backstory to how Dexter first took up the knife. With young Dex now on his path to becoming the character we first knew, I was satisfied and didn’t really feel the need for another season. (When the cancellation was reported, I was a bit surprised to be reminded they’d ever considered a second season, although Showtime’s appetite for milking its past hits appears to be quite deep. Killing Original Sin may also be a consequence of the turmoil over the parent company’s sale to Skydance.)
I get the reluctance among former fans like Hector to get back on the Dexter bandwagon after the way they ended the original series, or even the New Blood sequel. But all skepticism aside, Resurrection felt like a return to form, with more provocative stories than they’d told in a while: the secret club of serial killers, Peter Dinklage as the billionaire death fetishist, Harrison making his first kill out of the Dexter playbook, Angel Batista’s vendetta against his former colleague. While we can argue over which show is better, my read on why Paramount would drop Original Sin and possibly keep Resurrection going has everything to do with Michael C. Hall’s portrayal of this iconic character. He’s the engine here, and this most recent season pumped new life into a franchise many of us had written off. Given all of the corporate upheaval, I’m not sure where things are headed next, but I won’t be surprised if Resurrection is officially resurrected again soon.
As for The Waterfront, I’d just write that off as a misfire. (I had to go back into my records to remind myself that I’d even sampled it; the show was that generic. I believe I gave up after the first episode, as usual, having to budget my time in this era of streaming dumps.) Failure happens, even with talented creators like Kevin Williamson, whose pedigree no doubt accounts for why Netflix took this swing.
Brotherly Love and Love Triangles
Question: I’m kind of disappointed with this season of The Summer I Turned Pretty. Belly is desperately trying to be an emotional bulwark for Jeremiah and Conrad, tolerating cheating and rude treatment just to protect the feelings of Susannah’s boys. Accepting a marriage proposal from gorgeous cheating Jeremiah makes no sense, and like My Life with the Walter Boys, the show festers with brother-on-brother chaos over the same girl. Maybe these shows appeal to folks who dream of cheating on their spouses with their in-laws, but I just don’t see the appeal in creating a lifelong rift between siblings. The romantic promise of these shows now feels cringy and incestuous. What do you make of these very familial love triangles? Am I being too harsh, or are they getting the “ick” factor just right? — Sara
Matt Roush: In the interest of full disclosure, I’ll admit up front that while I do try to sample all kinds of TV as best I can and try not to show my considerable age, the genre of YA teen romance mostly escapes me, especially when it comes to this subgenre of torn-between-two-hunky-brothers. I daresay I would second Sara’s opinions if I could even get past the trailers for these shows.
Walk Down the Aisle Already!
Comments: Fans who have been shipping Elizabeth and Nathan on When Calls the Heart for eight seasons now are wondering if they’ll ever tie the knot and give fans the blended family they’ve been hoping for. – Patricia G
Matt Roush: And this sentiment is, I’m sure, exactly what Hallmark Channel likes to hear. This isn’t a spoiler column, so even if I knew (which I don’t) how this long-simmering romance will evolve, I wouldn’t tell you. But shows like these are predicated on the hope of an ultimate happy ending, so I imagine fans will get their wish at some point. Just can’t say when, and because the end of the series is nowhere in sight (yet), I can’t help wondering if the show’s producers worry that by making this core couple official, it could signal the beginning of the end.
Having a Ball with Tennis
Comment: I was thrilled by the coverage of the US Open Tennis Tournament on Hulu! Every match was covered (unlike last year, when major players like Coco Gauff could only be seen playing on ESPN) until the finals, which were not shown on Hulu. Boo! The women’s final was not even shown on ABC, but the men’s final was. I know downplaying or not even showing the women’s matches is not new, but I am just so disappointed that Disney/ESPN/Hulu/ABC chose to again diminish the fabulous women players in this sport. So disheartening. Thanks for letting me vent. Love this column! – Mel B.
Matt Roush: Couldn’t agree more about the pleasure of watching this year’s US Open, including the thrilling final matches of the two top men’s players and those powerful women. (I also had the pleasure of getting a grounds pass on one of the afternoons during the first week of play to watch in person during some of the best late-August weather I’ve ever experienced in this area.) That said, I don’t think I was even aware that the Open was available on Hulu without an ESPN add-on during the run of the tournament (shows you how much I know about the intricacies of sports rights and streaming). I guess I’m not surprised that they would reduce the streaming footprint for the finals, which appears to be a function of exclusivity in the contracts. But I don’t see the women’s final airing on ESPN instead of ABC as much if any of a diminishment. That’s where most fans were already watching the sport, and ABC’s contracts with college football on Saturdays precluded them from airing the women’s match. There was no such conflict on Sunday for the men’s match.
The High Cost of Streaming
Question: I was wondering why we haven’t heard of any new TV shows coming this Fall from streaming services yet? Also, I’ve heard prices are going up on Peacock and Paramount+. How do they expect to keep customers when their catalog of new (good) original shows is so limited? And why don’t some of these services combine to double their content? — JL
Matt Roush: Let me direct you to TV Guide Magazine’s Fall Preview issue, currently on stands, which leans heavily into new streaming series. Which is hardly a surprise, considering that NBC and ABC are presenting exactly one new series each in the fall (a reality show featuring Jimmy Fallon on NBC, a 9-1-1 spinoff on ABC), Fox is offering only two (both game shows), and CBS is going big on spinoffs with only one new comedy and one reality show. The idea of a “new fall TV season” isn’t what it used to be, that’s for sure.
As for the cost of streaming subscriptions, the great Joe Adalian’s Buffering column on Vulture just reported on the trend of price increases, which isn’t likely to subside. And while this is a true and growing concern, keep in mind that these charges reflect not just the availability (or lack thereof) of new and library-scripted series on these platforms but their investment in all-important sports rights. (When the next Olympics rolls around, I can’t imagine not having Peacock and its all-purpose Olympics hub.) In the bigger picture, more and more consumers are choosing to unplug from cable, which is also more expensive than ever, and divert their budget to a streaming portal with multiple subscriptions, which obviously do add up. Several of these streamers are, however, offering bundles with other platforms to help bring the cost down. And some analysts have predicted that not all of these streaming services will survive in the long run, in which case they might fold their catalog into another, though for now their parent companies see them as valuable brand extensions. But there’s no way around it: To get access to the best of streaming, it’s going to cost you.
And Finally …
Question: What is the connection between expensive medications and dancing in these TV commercials today? I would rather hear the benefits of the meds and forgo the shaking of the leg. — Richard F., Plymouth, MI
Matt Roush: Good (and amusing) question. These weight-loss chorus lines feel to me like a way of merrily distracting us from the laundry list of side effects the announcer is going on about, and much like other health-care ads which show people on picnics or hikes or other pleasant and/or athletic endeavors, the purpose is to project upbeat images rather than focus on the maladies these drugs are meant to address. (Honestly, with many of these ads, I’m left wondering what it is they’re trying to make better.)
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.)
Dexter: Original Sin where to stream
When Calls the Heart (2014) 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