Yahoo Lifestyle ‘Watson’ Is The Perfect Background Show
Note: This article contains spoilers for the first episode of the CBS series “Watson,” which premiered Sunday.
The tried-and-true network TV procedural is having a moment right now. ABC’s “High Potential,” starring Kaitlin Olson as a citizen sleuth, just got renewed for a second season. Over on CBS, three of the network’s recent additions are variations on the procedural: “Elsbeth,” a spinoff of “The Good Wife” and “The Good Fight”; a reimagined “Matlock” starring Kathy Bates; and now, the medical mystery drama “Watson,” featuring Morris Chestnut as the titular doctor.
The show is yet another installment in the Sherlock Holmes universe, beginning six months after Holmes’ death. Watson, who has recently recovered from a brain injury, goes to work at a clinic in Pittsburgh where he leads a team of doctors solving rare medical mysteries.
The first episode premiered Sunday following the AFC championship game, but, in typical CBS fashion, it won’t start airing in its regular timeslot, Sundays at 9 p.m., until Feb. 16. The show is also available on Paramount+.
HuffPost’s Erin E. Evans, Marina Fang and Njera Perkins put on our detective hats to discuss our initial impressions of “Watson.”
Morris Chestnut As A Leading Man
Morris Chestnut has a great track record on network television, so I was very excited to hear about his return to lead “Watson.” I loved him in Fox’s “Rosewood,” another procedural drama (RIP), as private pathologist Dr. Beaumont, so it was interesting to see him switch gears as a “doctective” within the Sherlock Holmes lore.
I’ll admit, his name was the only hook for me initially because I’m not well-versed on all things Holmes. In “Watson,” he plays the titular character with the same charm we’ve seen in his previous roles — handsome, smooth-talking and ever so witty. That held my attention for the first portion of the pilot, but it was a struggle for me to hold on through the remaining episodes. As alluring as Chestnut is onscreen, I don’t think his star power is enough to carry the entire show. — Njera
Totally agree, Njera. A lot of watching this show was trying to distinguish between whether I actually liked the show itself or whether it was that I just love watching him. His charisma is unquestionably such a driving force of this show, and watching him very decisively solve medical mysteries is great — but not enough to sustain my interest overall. — Marina
CBS And Its Love For These Kinds Of Procedurals (‘Elsbeth,’ ‘Matlock’)
Honestly, I’m a sucker for these kinds of shows: There’s a somewhat mysterious or quirky protagonist who has assembled a team to figure out some kind of case every week — whether it’s medical, legal or otherwise; all while there’s some longer storyline percolating in the background. CBS has that going with “Elsbeth” and “Matlock,” a couple of my other favorite weekly watches. I love these kinds of shows because they’re so easy to just turn on and watch while you’re doing other things; they’re necessary to my sanity. THAT said, I do wish network television was more risky in its choices for the kinds of shows it greenlights. Like, I think “Watson” works for the most part, but imagine if it were sexier? The eye candy of Chestnut + some super sexy moments? Imagine the kind of audience it could draw in. It’s a bit too timid in that regard. — Erin
I had the same thought, Erin! I immediately thought of how CBS now has all three of these procedurals. Sure, they’ve got slightly different vibes, but as you said, they’re all working within similar structures and formats. Network TV is a tricky balance: there’s a certain box the show has to fit in, and it often runs into the problem of trying to please everyone — and therefore, possibly pleasing no one. Despite those limitations, I do try to remind myself that there’s still a lot of value in shows that follow a familiar formula. We all need a background show! I’ve been watching a lot of complex streaming shows lately: shows like “Severance” and “Paradise” that require your full and undivided attention to keep all the pieces of the show together. It’s nice to alternate those shows with something like this, where I can turn off my brain a bit.
Speaking of CBS, years ago, they also had “Elementary,” which was a similar concept: Lucy Liu as Watson in a loose Sherlock Holmes spinoff. I felt similarly about that show: great star power, but the appeal of the show itself petered out after a while. — Marina
I think 'Watson' works for the most part, but imagine if it were sexier? The eye candy of Chestnut + some super sexy moments? Imagine the kind of audience it could draw in.Erin E. Evans
Erin, I’m with you on the super sexy moments. That reminds me how viewers were so excited about Chestnut’s role in Hulu’s “Reasonable Doubt” because they spared us nothing. I love a good background show, but when you have an actor like Chestnut as the face of a series, you’ve got to spice things up. — Njera
100%. — Marina
What Works On The Show
I mean, Morris Chestnut works. Like you said, Marina, his charisma pretty much always works for me. I also just love that the medical cases he solves get resolved by the end of the episode. Rochelle Aytes also works well opposite him. — Erin
I like the ensemble cast they assembled, although I’m not familiar with most of them. Rochelle Aytes is great, but I’m hoping they lean more into her character and Watson’s tension-filled dynamic to give us some memorable moments. — Njera
What Doesn’t Work On The Show
I’m kind of having a hard time keeping up with the B storyline on the show. Randall Park appears at the end of the first episode, and I’m kind of unclear what his actual role is. Also, Chestnut’s sidekick Shinwell (Ritchie Coster) is clearly up to some shady business, but five episodes in, I’m not sure I’m invested in what’s happening there. — Erin
I’m so curious to see if Park shows up in future episodes — I imagine his role is pretty limited. But it was fun to see him pop up, so I hope he recurs often enough that we start to figure out who he is. — Marina
Yeah, if the B storyline wasn’t so mysterious and cryptic I feel like I’d be more intrigued, but I’m much more interested in the different medical mysteries the crew is busy solving every episode. Even after five episodes, I’d expect a little more progression, but that plot still has me confused.
I also hope the action kicks up overall because I’m not sure I’m invested enough to keep up with the remainder of the season. — Njera
Yeah, after a couple of episodes, I could see where it was going.
This is a specific-to-me quibble, but I grew up in Pittsburgh, where this show is set, and a lot of the regional references felt very shoehorned in. Some of them didn’t even make sense to me, like the bridges being closed during a big rainstorm? It’s also obvious the bulk of the show wasn’t filmed there (it was shot in Vancouver for the tax credits). Anyway, just a warning for anyone else watching who’s from Pittsburgh and might be predisposed to looking out for those details, lol. I think if you’re going to make the choice to set a show in a specific place, there needs to be some specificity! — Marina
I noticed that, too, Marina, and I’ve never even been to Pittsburgh. I’ve never liked when shows try to make their settings a background character when it doesn’t feel authentic to the premise. In “Watson,” it just felt a bit unnecessary, but, again, it’s just a minor detail I think some viewers can look past. — Njera
Should You Watch It?
If you, like me, are a sucker for a procedural drama — especially one starring fine-ass Morris Chestnut, then you definitely need to be locked in every week. — Erin
If you’re not a fan of slow-paced medical mysteries, then “Watson” may not be for you. But, if you want a reason to see Chestnut on your TV screen week to week, this series is it. — Njera
What both of you said. I wouldn’t call this show a must-see, but we’re going to need a lot of ways to dissociate from *gestures at everything*, so here’s to more background television! — Marina
