Ask Matt: Ziva and ‘NCIS,’ ‘Conners,’ Post-Roseanne, a Better ‘Fight’ Without Blum & 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.
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] (or use the form at the end of the column) and follow me on Twitter. Look for Ask Matt columns on most Tuesdays and Fridays.
What About the Child?
Question: Will there be any mention on NCIS about Tony and (daughter) Tali from Ziva regarding their current status and location, and is there any information if Ziva was in contact all those years with Tony and her daughter? — Eugenia
Matt Roush: Questions like these veer into potential spoiler territory, which I usually aim to avoid, but the subject does come up in TV Guide Magazine‘s cover story in the Returning Favorites issue out this week. In the interview, Cote de Pablo notes that the threat that brings her back into Gibbs’ (Mark Harmon) orbit also involves “trying to keep her daughter a secret and safe from the people who are trying to get to Gibbs and to her.” For more details about this and other returning series, pick up the Returning Favorites issue (on stands and coming to subscribers this week).
Life, and Love, After Roseanne?
Question: I haven’t ever seen The Conners, but I really can’t believe that they really are trying to have Dan (John Goodman) be with another woman. I love Katey Sagal too, but this feels wrong. No matter how people feel about the real Roseanne, the character of Roseanne Conner deserves better. If I didn’t want to watch it before, I damn sure don’t want to watch it now. It may be real life, but this isn’t real life, it’s TV, and I can’t find it entertaining to see Dan and Roseanne’s marriage be forgotten or made to be nothing. — Lorraine
Matt Roush: Don’t even Roseanne’s survivors deserve a little happiness? Look, Roseanne Barr is the architect of her own misfortune when it comes to the way this revised reboot has played out, and besides, according to our reporting in the aforementioned Returning Favorites issue, “Dan is still having difficulty getting over Roseanne” this season, even if Sagal’s character of Louise is intended as a possible romantic interest for the widower. Sounds to me like, as with last season of The Conners, the show and the fictional family will continue to operate in the long shadow cast by its former title star, and if Dan attempting to move on presents emotional hurdles, that’s in keeping with the way real life, not to mention life on TV, tends to play out. And I don’t see how expecting the character of Dan to stay in a perpetual state of mourning would honor the character of Roseanne anyway.
Taking the Sheen Off The Good Fight
Question: As a lawyer, I have really enjoyed The Good Fight (as well as The Good Wife before it). But I really have hated the 3rd season’s introduction of Michael Sheen‘s character, Roland Blum. His every scene turned a taut believable drama into an unpleasant, unbelievable farce. Love the actor, hate the character. Please tell me Roland Blum will not be back as a character in the 4th season. — Ken
Matt Roush: Can’t confirm or deny, although I agree that even for a show that often engages in such broad and savage satire, the over-the-top character of Blum — and Sheen’s hammy performance, which I’m sure delivered what was asked of him — was unbearable, and the Roy Cohn parody was never as funny as they must have thought it would be. Haven’t heard much yet regarding the next season of The Good Fight, but given that Michael Sheen is starring in a new series (Prodigal Son) for Fox, in a role almost as outrageous as Blum (a convicted serial killer who helps his criminal-psychologist son solve murders), you’d have to think that even if Blum does return, he wouldn’t occupy nearly as much space.
In Defense of Pearson
Question: I have to disagree with your remarks (in the Aug. 27 column) concerning USA’s Pearson. I think you should have waited a few more more weeks before you bash it. It’s coming around. If you paid attention, you would see that there’s a lot going to go on soon. — John C
Matt Roush: If you had read my own comments more closely, you would see that I did my due diligence on this disappointing show, “trudging” through the entire 10-episode season before filing my negative review. (So we can agree to disagree on this one.) Things do begin to happen as the first season nears its finale on Sept. 18, but it’s still a dreary and uninspired premise, wasting a great character and star. I felt that way all through the series, and nothing in the finale changed my opinion. (To be honest, I had to go back and consult my notes to remind myself what even happened, as Pearson’s unrelenting mediocrity made it fade into memory almost as soon as I watched it.)
Will Today Ever Come?
Question: I’m not sure if this is a question you can help me with, but … I’m reading a book called Today Will Be Different, written by Maria Semple (Where’d You Go, Bernadette?). I’m only halfway through and I’m in love with it. I wanted to recommend it to a friend, but I wasn’t sure how to describe it, so I went to Wikipedia. While there (and subsequently on several entertainment websites), I learned that the book was to be made into an HBO miniseries produced by and starring Julia Roberts. Other than that bit of information (from 2017), I can’t find a single tidbit of information about the production. With Roberts’ success in Amazon Prime Video’s Homecoming, it seems likely that they would want to do this. Though I’m afraid that the box office for Where’d You Go, Bernadette? may have put an end to this Semple adaptation. — Mark W
Matt Roush: I wouldn’t lose hope — although this project wasn’t mentioned when HBO presented at the summer TCA press tour, and there have been no casting announcements or further updates in the industry trades since the original reporting on the deal. It can take years for projects like this to see the light — I remember fielding similar questions about Game of Thrones all though its years-long gestation — and the timing could also be contingent on the star’s schedule. (She filmed Homecoming for Amazon long after Today was announced as her first-ever TV series.) This project is still among those listed as in development on Roberts’ imdb.com page, so stay tuned.
When Twice Isn’t Nice
Question: No matter how much I love a show, I don’t like it when the networks run two episodes back to back on the same night. Recently they have done it with Instinct and Spin the Wheel. All of the networks have done it at one time or another. Spread them out and show them weekly like it’s supposed to be. — Unsigned
Matt Roush: I would assume then that binge-watching isn’t in your vocabulary? In many cases when networks double-run a show on the same night, it’s to burn off episodes, especially in summer and with marginally rated series. I agree that too much of anything isn’t necessarily a good thing, although there have been occasions when a two-part episode merits the back-to-back treatment, which if done properly can be more satisfying than waiting a week between episodes. And some series premiere with back-to-back episodes in an attempt to hook viewers, and I get that strategy as well. But more often than not, when you see back-to-back episodes of a series, especially on broadcast TV, it’s a sign that they’re cutting bait.
And Finally …
Question: What’s the deal with The Talking Dead? — Leo
Matt Roush: I take it you mean: When is the after-show coming back? After a hiatus for most of the summer, Talking is expected to return for Fear the Walking Dead‘s season finale on Sept. 29, and presumably will continue more regularly when the higher-profile The Walking Dead returns a week later. Not sure why Talking took a hiatus, but I’m not much of a fan of this sort of hot-air hype unless they’re actually talking about some truly major event, so in this case, I look at it as a case of less truly being more, and silence being golden.
That’s all for now. Thanks as always for reading, and remember that I 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 Twitter (@TVGMMattRoush), and you can also submit questions via the handy form below. Please include a first name with your question.
Conversation14 Comments
Please read the TV Insider Community Guidelines.
Comments are closed on this story.
-
R
I'm not a binge-watcher, either. If I enjoy a show, I'd rather spread it out and prolong my enjoyment.
5
-
G
I agree. Meanwhile my mom (watches almost every scripted show on broadcast and cable) also dislikes Pearson.
Plus it's only natural that The Conners introduce another female character . Who can argue with enlisting the great Katey Sagal?
-
G
So glad I'm not the only one !
1
-
G
Well, since Arte Johnson died, I've been usually watching "Laugh-In" on DVD with 2 eps back-to-back each day. Right now, I'm at the fourth season which turned out to be his last but I know he'll return for the 100th ep the following season. I hope to finish with the sixth and final season either at the end of this month or maybe early October.
-
R
I find that if I watch more than three episodes of a show on a single day, it can mess with my sleep and dreams. So three is my limit, and I often limit it to two.
1
-
O
It depends on the show for me. Average shows I prefer one ep a week. Anything truly great I’ll take multiple episodes at once every.single.time.
-
-
O
I love Katey as Peggy Bundy and for me no matter what she does after like Futurama or another show I enjoyed 8 Simple Rules etc. she was so perfect as Peg that that's always who she is in my mind and that's just how amazing she was in that part along with the rest of that perfect Married with children ensemble. BUT I have to say I definitely agree that it doesn't really feel right to have Dan with another woman, especially this soon for a man who had this amazing marriage for 30+ years. It reminds me of Good Times when they tried to have Florida hurry up and date another dude after James had died.... THE SAME SEASON. It pissed people off so much including Esther Rolle herself that the year she came back they had killed Moses Gunn's character off. I don't watch The Connor's myself but I was kind of shocked when I heard myself about this. I'm sorry but I'm Dan\Roseanne forever lol.
1
-
G
I agree with you on both counts. Katey & Ed O'Neil will always be Peg & Al. They were perfect. And MWC is still as funny today. I've also enjoyed both actors in their other roles as well. But, one sound of Katey's distinctive voice & I expect to hear "Oh Al, rub my tushie"!
I also agree it's way too soon to be forcing a love interest on Dan. Although, Dear Abby was always filled with questions from Family/friends of long, happily married men who met & remarried within 6 months of their wives deaths. It was always men. But, it just seems forced.Let them grieve & adjust to life without Roseanne.
1
-
P
I would definitely recommend you and Lorainne give the show a look, then, because they've actually been very respectful, not just towards the character of Roseanne, but towards Dan and Roseanne's marriage as well. They talked about it constantly last season, and showed Dan openly mourning her and struggling to deal with such a painful loss (there was even a whole thing about him not being ready to move on with someone new). And the family has talked about her constantly, too, and been there to support Dan, and we've seen the struggle of her death on them as well.
They clearly have no intention of diminishing or dismissing the history between Dan and Roseanne, so I have no doubt, if they do decide to eventually put Dan and Louise together, they'll do so in a very respectful, sensitive way. And I stress "if they do"-sure, the show is talking about the possibility, but that doesn't mean it's definitely happening, nor does it mean that if it does happen, it's going to happen soon. Nor does it mean that even if they do get together, it'll last. And besides that, as Matt so aptly notes, this show is grounded in reality, and the stuff going on with Dan is very much a part of reality for a lot of people who've lost spouses.
I loved Dan and Roseanne's marriage, too. It will always stand as one of the best marriages ever put on TV. But the fact remains that she's not here now, so it makes sense the show would decide to look forward as a result. And whether Dan's interaction with Louise stays platonic or becomes romantic, I'm curious to see what happens.
1
-
R
I don't watch The Connors, but I've seen similar situations on other shows (in which a spouse dies on the show). My questions would be A) how much time has gone by on the show since Roseanne "died"? And B), is Katey Sagal's character going to be a "love interest" from the get-go, or is she simply going to start out as a friend or acquaintance? It may be very obvious that Dan is going to have a relationship with the woman, but if they start out platonically, it's not as bad as having him jump into a relationship right away.
-
G
The show has such a large , strong ensemble cast that it just seems unnecessary right now. And, isn't Darlene dating somebody? And Becky's pregnant, right? (I only watch occasionally) Seems like they have plenty going on. Personally, the humor seems more forced in the reboot. The original was just so good!
-
O
Definitely agree especially about Married still being as funny today as yesterday, maybe even funnier because it'd probably be seen as edgier and more irreverent now than 30 years ago lol signs of our sad times I guess.
-
-
B
I would have to agree with Matt on Pearson that it sorta dragged but I have watched in hope it would be a little better.. Chicago politics and the like have been covered many many times before...
-
P
Pearson: One of the better television shows. I hope it gets renewed. Sure beats another "walking dead", "dracula" or " non-reality" reality show.