Ask Matt: Postponing ‘Savant,’ Boycotts, Not Much ‘Brother’-ly Love
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.
Should The Savant Have Been Postponed?
Question: I’d barely breathed a sigh of relief — a shaky sigh, since Sinclair owns my ABC station — over the lifting of Jimmy Kimmel‘s suspension before Apple TV+ filled the Corporate Cowardice vacuum by pulling The Savant two days before its premiere. Because they were, I dunno, afraid of offending white supremacists? Did you ever in your scariest dreams think the U.S. would turn into a dictatorship? Anyway, the reason I’m writing is because I want to know if you saw the show, and, if so, what was its quality level? (Obviously, I’m not asking for a full-length review, just a general assessment.) — More Frightened by the Day, Ryan
Matt Roush: Unless Apple TV+ puts The Savant on “indefinite” pause (borrowing ABC’s recent terminology), which doesn’t appear to be the case, I’ll refrain from making too direct a comparison between these situations. The brief suspension of Jimmy Kimmel Live was most definitely the latest case of a broadcast network bowing to perceived threats of government pressure, though this was short-lived and didn’t result in the sorts of unfortunate settlements we witnessed earlier regarding ABC News and CBS News. In the case of The Savant (which was to have premiered last Friday), this is a thriller inspired by fact which stars Jessica Chastain as a woman who works for an agency that monitors hate groups online with the intent of stopping racist and other extremists before they commit violence. The decision by Apple TV+ to delay the premiere feels to me less like self-censorship than an instance of a content provider exercising what they call an abundance of caution during a fraught time of political violence. Whether this move was ill-advised will be in the eye of the beholder.
There is precedence for this, with many examples of networks temporarily pulling episodes of crime dramas or other shows with violent content following mass shootings or similarly tragic and upsetting events. From what I saw of The Savant (I watched the first episodes that were scheduled for Sept. 26 but haven’t had time to complete the series), it’s a disturbing and timely drama with scenes that very much reflect the violent and polarized temperature of our times. I’ll most likely recommend the series when it’s rescheduled and once I preview it in its entirety. My gut reaction to the streamer’s decision, though, is that I’m not sure there will ever be a “safe” time to air such a project, and its relevance is a potent argument for scheduling it in a timely fashion. I hope everyone who wants to see it gets the opportunity soon.
Boycotts Are Nothing New
Question: Some TV history: Back in NYPD Blue‘s first season, how many local stations boycotted that show before they realized it was a big hit??? That’s one I remember, given the recent issue of boycotts of shows. These days, it’s less of an issue with streaming, anyway. For me, just put on the Carson Tonight shows on the FAST networks and get a true late-night show even 40-50 years old. It sure holds up. I watched it every night in college in the early 1970s, something I bet today’s college students don’t do. — Douglas H.
Matt Roush: I remember covering the launch of NYPD Blue back in 1993 and the controversy over its adult content, which would hardly make anyone bat an eye today. Nearly a quarter of ABC’s stations refused to air the show initially, but most, if not all, eventually conceded once the publicity led to a spike in major-market ratings, and also when it became clear that the series’s high quality of writing and acting superseded squeamishness over its language and sexual content. I’m just glad the dust has settled for now in the late-night arena, and Kimmel and his peers have been on fire lately with their defense of free speech. And you’ll get no argument from me on the pleasures of revisiting Johnny Carson‘s Tonight Show era. Those were the days. (Regarding today’s college students: I’m fairly sure they don’t watch anything in the ways we used to.)
Oh, Brother!
Question: Who thought it would be a good idea to have only Big Brother contestants on the great The Amazing Race this season? As a loyal viewer from Season 1, this has to be one of the worst decisions. Some players are currently dating, some have dated in the past, some hate each other, and some have already won big on BB. If I didn’t love the scenery so much, I wouldn’t make it a must-watch this season. It will be a mute or fast-forward for me this season. And then the final sting was Phil Keoghan advertising to apply to be on the show? Why even bother at this point? I love Phil, and he does get excited for all of the players every season. He can be the best part of the show, but let’s go back to regular people applying and actually running the race for fun and not clicks on social media. — Teresa
Matt Roush: Moves like this put the “sin” in corporate synergy. I’m generally not a fan of recycling reality “stars” in other reality shows — looking at you, too, Dancing with the Stars — so I get where Teresa is coming from. At least with Race, you can pretend the race itself is the star of the show.
Oh Brother, Part 2
Comment: I hated Big Brother this season. Vince was disgusting. Ashley won, and she did nothing but ride someone else’s coattail. The old ugly b— Rachel was so rude. Morgan should have won, but didn’t. Beautiful did win the $50 grand, but I cannot believe he allowed Vince to continually screw him over. Oh well, another reality show off my viewing list. I only watch these crappy shows because there are otherwise just reruns on. I still like The Amazing Race because they go to some interesting places. No Bachelor or Bachelorette or Golden oldies or the Paradise one. (I still sort of like Survivor, too.) Favorite shows include Brilliant Minds, Tracker, High Potential, and Masterpiece on PBS. And don’t make any more NCIS shows in a different place. Be done. — Sandra R.
Matt Roush: Feel better getting all of that off your chest? That’s what we’re here for, but digesting this litany of woe makes me think that if one feels their choices are that limited and the disgust runs this deep, maybe an investment in even one streaming service might be worth it, just for variety. (I often guide Masterpiece fans to BritBox or Acorn TV for a wealth of solid British mysteries and dramas.) Or the free FAST channels for their copious library content, a reminder of a time when broadcast TV offered so many more entertaining options. As awful as this makes the most recent season of Big Brother sound, it alarms me to think of all the empty calories of TV time it took to form this opinion. (Personally, if this were the last show airing on TV, I’d trade in my TV.)
Could Rainmaker Herald a Deluge of Drama on USA?
Question: What do you think about The Rainmaker‘s recent performance on USA Network? It has done decently, considering the state of cable in 2025 and limited promotion. It’s been pulling better numbers than USA’s Briarpatch back in 2020 (which I bring up because it’s USA’s most recent scripted original that wasn’t a Syfy simulcast). It’s also done quite well on Peacock’s top 10 charts. Do you think this is a good sign? And potentially marks a brighter future for the USA Network scripted landscape? I know we’ve got Anna Pigeon coming next year from them, but the future truly is uncertain. — Mason
Matt Roush: I haven’t been following the numbers, if there are even numbers to be followed, but the fact that The Rainmaker could be causing even a ripple — considering it’s USA’s only scripted series of the moment and it occupies a very quiet Friday time slot — may be cause for cautious optimism. We’re still a long way away from USA’s glory days, when it aired several nights’ worth of “blue sky” escapism at any time. Given the challenging economics of basic cable channels, I’m not sure we’ll ever see that again (including on the Turner channels, which are just as impoverished programming-wise). What I’d like to see is more of Peacock’s under-the-radar scripted shows get a second window on USA — and when they are, promote them loudly.
There Ought to Be a Law
Comment: This is a two-part rant, I guess. I know with any form of TV, we have to suspend disbelief on certain things, but the season premiere of Law & Order may have been the dumbest episode ever. The victim was acquitted of killing Sam’s sister and another woman. Sam was the first suspect, and when the real killer is put on trial, Sam is on the prosecution like it were any other case. Nolan, the DA, the Judge, and even the DEFENSE ATTORNEY had no problem with that. Second rant: I know that with all Dick Wolf shows, the characters come and go. But the writers used to at least care how they were written out. If I get anything wrong, I apologize, but with this version of L&O: Anthony Anderson: no explanation; Jeffrey Donovan: two sentences; Camryn Manheim: two sentences; Mehcad Brooks: two sentences. Am I the only one who thinks the writers are becoming lazy or incompetent? — Edward H.
Matt Roush: This seems a fair criticism. The moment they knew Sam had a connection to this case, wiser minds should have recused her from having anything to do with it. (Same logic applies to TV doctors handling cases involving loved ones.) The ethical landmines in this particular story seem fairly obvious. Regarding the offhand dismissal of characters who go through the revolving door: Not everyone needs to go out in a blaze of glory, and when characters and/or actors are dropped and/or leave between seasons, I also get where bringing them back for closure’s sake may not always be possible (or affordable). But this trend does render these characters awfully disposable, so I’ll give you lazy if not incompetent.
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.)
Conversation23 Comments
Please read the TV Insider Community Guidelines.
Comments are closed on this story.
-
B
My wife and I watched about half an hour of the Amazing Race premiere with the Big Brother contestants before turning it off. We have never missed a season of The Amazing Race but we just didn't like these participants or the fact that CBS is using The Amazing Race as a publicity stunt for Big Brother. This is not a cancel culture rant against The Amazing Race, (we'll be back for the next season), it's just not something that appeals to us this season. CBS, don't use The Amazing Race as a cheap shill for your other reality shows. Get back to having regular, (non-media celebrities), compete in a race around the world. Give us back what the show originally was.
3
-
O
Why doesn't someone do Trump the series- would be a huge hit. They could change all the names so he couldn't sue or take it off. Larry David could do a comedy called Grump.
4 1
-
A
I have given myself permission to stop watching shows that originally appealed to me but soon became tiresome or predictable. For that reason I have stopped recording Doc, English Teacher and several on PBS.r I’ve even lost interest in NCIS. It’s amazing how freeing this has been!
3
-
P
I quit watching Fire Country after a couple of seasons... too much soap opera and not enough fire & rescue stuff.
I, too, quit watching NCIS for a while, a number of seasons ago. Then Gibbs retired and moved away and a new agent came on the scene, and it's a LOT better now.
1
-
-
A
We're skipping this season of The Amazing Race because of the Big Brother castings as well.
1
-
B
I'm confused... I thought Biden was "too senile" to run the country or make any decisions, but you're saying that he "controlled what we saw on TV." Which is it??
3 2
-
A
I'm still wondering why Chuck Cunningham was never mentioned again after that character stopped appearing on "Happy Days" (making Richie the oldest of that All-American family in that '50s-set show)!
1
-
O
Because they got rid of the character. Not that hard to comprehend.
6
-
G
Apparently it's hard for you to comprehend their statement. Its not about just getting rid of a character....it's the fact, as in Happy Days, that a family member just disappears and is NEVER even mentioned again. If your brother or son moves away you don't just never talk about them again or at least give viewers some sort of explanation. But continue on with your wealth of wisdom 🙄
5
-
-
B
Yes, that is definitely a big TV mystery. There are other shows in which characters disappear-- some reappear a season or two later (Kyra, on Reba), and some never do (Judy, from Family Matters). It's called the Chuck Cunningham Syndrome. 😆
4
-
C
Nobody cared this much AT THE TIME. He was barely on the show even then. Aside from the Christmas lights, and the one where Richie moved in with him, can you think of another Chuck moment -off the top of your head, without looking it up?
1
-
A
You have a good point, but my point is why after he stopped appearing, they never acknowledge his existence from then on only mentioning Richie and Joanie only as the Cunningham offspring of Howard and Marion. It's as if he's been purposefully retconned out of existence!
1
-
-
-
G
I LOVE the Amazing Race but, I too, have to sit this season out!! Especially the bargain basement of not going around the world. Never a fan of Big Brother or Survivor, The Amazing Race was in a class all by itself....until now!!
-
O
They have definitely dumbed-down the Amazing Race for the Big Brother people. Traveling only in Europe saves them from airport drama. And were the cars they drove stick shift? Nobody mentioned it, so I don't think so. bring back regular contestants with regular Amazing Race tasks!
-
-
O
DOC is advertised on this page TEN TIMES!!!!!!!!!! And now I will defintely NOT watch it!
-
G
Use a browser like DuckDuckGo and you won't see ads.
1
-
-
O
Remind me to cancel half my streaming from next June though August- nothing but crap. And now everything is coming in October!
-
B
I have to say, I disagree with "Douglas." I've tuned in a couple times to reruns of Johnny Carson's Late Show... and I find the humor does NOT hold up. IMO, topical humor does not age well.
2 2
-
O
Who rewatches the monlogues?
1
-
G
It ages well if you were alive to remember the times.. Oh sure some things probably wouldn't work today esp with references to gay stuff and lines in many of the skits but Carson in the political world made fun of all sides... And seeing all the movie and TV stars of the day who would show up..
1
-
-
G
Oh, poor Jim sounds like a scholar here. I bet he was saying the administration did nothing and B was senile, yet at the same time they controlled everything we saw on TV and alllllll of the Internet. If people like this weren't actually serious it'd be laughable.
1
-
G
Apple TV is not showing discretion - they are obeying in advance.
There is no comparison between Kimmel not being aired and NYPD Blue not being shown. Kimmel was not aired because of threats from the government. NYPD was not aired because certain stations didn't like the content, they weren't afraid of the government.
3
-
O
Nah, it’s no different than when the WB pulled that episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer and refused to air it right after the columbine shooting. That wasn’t just some stations, that was the entire network.
-
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