Dirty WHOers Podcast - Episode 63

Well, we all pretty much agreed on this one. This time around we cast a squiffy eye over the McCoy classic, as part of our attempt to do an episode for each Doctor in this the 50th year, 'Remembrance of the Daleks' [1988]. Actually, this was quite fun to do.

We've still got a few sound problems, as this was recorded at the same time as Mindwarp, but we're on the case and we'll sort it for the next one (probably).

We're still doing our thing over on Twitter, and pottering over on Facebook, with Lightfoot putting in the hours on Google Plus. If you could give us a vote of competence over on iTunes (or anywhere) that'd be awesome (and the cheque is in the mail).

Plus, if ya so inclined, don't forget the Dirty WHOers rating system and the Dirty WHOers drinking game. May god have mercy on your liver.

Dirty WHOers Podcast - Episode 62

Hola folks.

Well, here's our review of the classic series Colin Baker episode, Mindwarp [1987]. We 'pretty much' all agreed on this one. Pretty much. The usual bickering, etc. But pretty much.

We've been having recording problems of late, and a big thanks to The Prof for doing his best with these. We usually use Skype, but we tried a new system, which was good. Pretty much.

Unfortunately towards the end it goes a bit squeaky. Sorry, but we really couldn't be arsed re-recording this (Sputters liver would have never coped with it). We'll try and sort this, it's been a nightmare, we're on the case we promise.

Anyway. Enjoy ;)

Dirty WHOers Podcast - Episode 61

Beware, this one's got audio problems. We use Skype to record, and sometimes it (and the recording software we use) got 'out-of-sync'. We can't tell if it's doing this when we record (and it's doing it pretty badly on this one) and we really can't be arsed recording this stuff twice. Combined with Sputters still being pissed, it sometimes sounds like we're just talking over each over, which we are, admittedly, but not actually this bad. Sorry, but you'll have to bear with it or give this one a miss, screw it up into a ball, and toss it over a rainbow.

Anyway, finally our review of 'Name of the Doctor' [2013]. Enjoy as best you can.

We're also over doing the Twitter thing, Sputters is rockin' Facebook, and Terry kicks butt over at Google Plus, where we share all the news and pics and stuff we find around the net. If you could give us a vote of love over on iTunes (or anywhere) that'd be awesome. If not, no worries, but we will kill a kitten for every follower who doesn't. Ta :)

Dirty WHOers Podcast - Episode 60

You're going to have to excuse Sputters on this one. This time around (as part of determined run at doing one for each Doctor this year) we take a look at the Davison classic, 'Planet of Fire' [1984]. We started a bit late though, and he'd been drinking for a while. Still, we muddled through.

We're still posting all the usual over at Facebook, on Twitter, and on Google Plus. Plus, if ya so inclined, don't forget the Dirty WHOers rating system and the Dirty WHOers drinking game.

Bottoms up :)

Dirty WHOers Podcast - Episode 59.1

A little something extra that didn't fit anywhere else. A quick 10 minute trans-Atlantic bickering session about the last season [2013] at the end of a long session of the usual podcasting. It's crap, but mercifully short.

If you have anything to say we'd love to hear it, over at Facebook, on Twitter or on Google Plus. Don't forget the Dirty WHOers rating system and the Dirty WHOers drinking game.

Another full-length podcast coming soon :)

Dirty WHOers Podcast - Episode 59

So, here we are again. Another week, and other sterling edit c/o The Prof. This time around we finally take a look at 'The Crimson Horror' and 'Nightmare in Silver' [2013].

We know. We know. It's long over due. Alas, we have lives. There are, however, important questions need answering: Why wasn't there more Jenny? Why 'Warwick' isn't pronounced like that. Why Strax is (or isn't) a turd in armour? Why wasn't there more Jenny? Why the children (just, why)? Is there any rationality to the continuity of crimson croissant poison? Cyber-cock, what the hell went wrong there then? Why wasn't there more Jenny? etc.

It's better than it sounds.*

Enjoy.

Any feedback, come slag us off over at Facebook, on Twitter or over at Google Plus, where we share the daily bollocks we find around the web. If ya need it go check out the Dirty WHOers rating system or the Dirty WHOers drinking game.

*not true.

Dirty WHOers Podcast - Episode 58

Finally we're sober enough to kick out another podcast. This time around it's our eager frothing review of the 1975 Big Tom classic, Terror of the Zygons, as part of our disorderly efforts to nail an episode of each Doctor in this the 50th year.

It's all no-frills Tam O'Shanter's and Crossroads. Oolon (maybe) peeing in a bottle, hand puppet monsters, the highland gas industry, porridge (sugar and milk, or salt and austerity) and the usual debauchery. Ahh well, it's free, and you get what ya pay for.

A big thanks, as ever, to The (loverly and cuddly) Prof for the pig's-ear-to-purse edit and, if you need it, don't forget the Dirty WHOers rating system and the Dirty WHOers drinking game gubbins.

We're also over at in' Twitter and at Facebook and Google Plus, where we share all the news and pics and stuff we find around the net. If you could give us a vote of love over on iTunes (or anywhere) that'd be awesome. If not, no worries, but remember we do know where your kids play.

Dirty WHOers Podcast - Episode 57

Hey folks.

Another week of Who, another podcast. We're kicking them out, in this the anniversary year. Don't worry, it won't last.

This time we engage in (occasionally heated) debate at two episodes out of the new series, 'Hide' and 'Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS  [2013] (watch out for the very special rant about the Eye of Harmony). With undertones of Scooby Do and with a run-around the TARDIS on the cards, we always knew this was going to be a shouty one - and we knew Sen would have plenty to say :)

This one has been out for a few days already on iTunes (and via the RSS feed). If you want to get these ramblings before other peeps, please subscribe.
A big thanks  as ever, to The Prof for banging out such a quick edit, and (if it confuses you as much as it confuses Terry) we've now put the Dirty WHOers rating system online (as well as the obligatory Dirty WHOers drinking game).

We're also over at Facebook (deal with it) and rockin' Twitter and Google Plus, where we share the daily bollocks we find around the web.

Come say 'ello, and cheers again for putting up with us. It's like care in the community.

Some thoughts on Doctor Who fans calling other fans "negative."

This season I keep reading fan's posts labeling other fans as "negative" because they didn't like a story or even this season. These "negative" nay-sayers have dared to be honest and critical.

Does that mean they don't like Doctor Who?

   Yeah, I wanted to like this week's story, "Nightmare in Silver," I really did(me and Neil Gaiman have a thing, he just doesn't know about it and that’s the way we like it.) But there was a lot that let me down, didn't grip me and annoyed me. Even simply the way the characters were behaving was somehow off to me. I don't want to get into it(off topic, believe it or not), but this was my gut feeling as it finished. Before it started, I had built it up to two friends who were there watching along with me. Afterwards, they asked if I had enjoyed it. I said "meh". Immediately the floodgates opened and they jumped in with "Oh good, because we thought it didn't compare to other good Doctor Who stories, but we didn't want to offend you." It's so sweet they didn't want to offend my fanatical Whovian sensibilities, but I can take it. They then proceeded to rake it over the coals, beyond my own personal objections to the story.

   Hey, say what you like. You are free to express yourself. If you don't like something I like, that's alright. Some people don't like chocolate(WHAT!?). Does that make them "negative"? The only negativity present is when people try to deny others the right to 'not like' a certain story and voice their opinions(This works for life in general). The irony is that they use the word "negative" to somehow discourage, disparage, or censor the people that disagree with their positive experience of the story. Voicing a preference in any direction, positive or negative, should not be labeled a negative act. It may be a negative reaction or opinion, but the person is not being negative. 'Negative' is not allowing others to express another opinion, or thinking their differing opinion somehow lessens yours.  He/she is sharing a preference and this is a constructive act, a positive act, an act of trust in others to listen with respect, regardless of any personal views. Additional viewpoints strengthen everyone. Your views don't invalidate my thoughts on the subject and vice-versa. This sharing of opinions is what makes a community strong, open, and intelligent. The TARDIS goes anywhere in Space and Time and so can our minds.

   Also, having a bit of humor in your heart helps when someone tells you 'Love and Monsters' is one of their favorite Doctor Who stories(WHAT?!).

Seriously, WTF?

     ~ Terry Lightfoot. ;-)

Dirty WHOers Podcast - Episode 56

Roll up. Roll up. See the wastrels review another episode. Be amazed as they pay homage to the Pertwee era. Marvel as they talk about 'Carnival of Monsters' [1973]. Witness them slur their vowels and forget what they were talking about...

Once again we gather together in the customs room of fate (thanks to The Profs editing) to froth on about lighting farts, Gallifreyan bureaucracy, sweaty plastic hats, the spy skills of Katy Manning and fist fighting with Harry, pen toppers that eat space ships, missing UNIT family members, f'words while filming or it's for keeps, the subtle social messages of Robert Holmes, flappy bald things, nail clippers up the ass, and some stuff about Doctor Who.

Are we boring when we agree? Mercifully, it's very short. Remember, If y'need it, here's the Dirty WHOers rating system, and the Dirty WHOers drinking game.

This is therapy. Thanks for listening.