Speaking as someone that has been writing Doctor Who reviews since April 2022 - originally for the other site, but now exclusively for TG - there are certain gripes I have when making them.
For instance - I would much rather be forced to review an abysmal story than one that attempts nothing new or interesting. At least when the story is objectively awful I can rip it to shreds.
For my fellow reviewers here, are there any things that really get your goat when reviewing a story?
Itās pretty much the same thing for me, stories where that have no unique or interesting factors to them are just painful to write about.
I think the hardest review Iāve had to write would be Sword of Orion, simply because itās a story that tries literally nothing new and is completely void of substance. Itās not terrible but thereās nothing to talk about.
I love reviewing terrible stories. Complaining is great fun, but more than that, I like finding things that are still enjoyable in there. A 4/10 story is my sweet spot, really. I find it a lot more difficult to talk about stories I enjoy. I just write shorter reviews for boring stories if I donāt have as much to say about them.
Reviewing terrible stories - such as The Web Planet - is easy because I can point to so many things that I dislike about them. The same thing goes for great stories. The hardest part is reviewing forgettable, boring or lacklustre stories because there is not enough good or bad stuff in them to point out, and you end up writing that they are very average but nothing special.
100% agree with this.
Iād say especially if the story is pretty universally loved. Like I know Iām gonna struggle to review āChimesā when I get round to it, because pretty much everything has been said about it.
Because of our earlier conversation in the āLost Storiesā thread, Stream, I was half expecting to see the dreaded words āMission to Magnusā 
Well, I was going to mention it as an example, but I decided to return to my favourite pastime, which is to bash on the trainwreck that is The Web Planet.
But Mission is another easy one to write stuff about because itās so excruciatingly bad.
Very much so. Conventionally good stories are right there with boring stories in that thereās so little to actually comment on. I could probably gush for hours about all the things that make Cyberwoman a masterpiece, but only because itās so universally hated.
Iāve been updating all my old Bernice Summerfield reviews from when I used to upload to TimeScales, and itās been a joy to refresh my memory of certain more experimental stories.
Itās also been a joy to update those reviews, because the original versions had no paragraphs and were a right royal mess!
I do still have fond memories of reviewing āThe Masquerade of Deathā in particular - because Sheargold really pushed the boat and attempted to so something really bizarre.
Same applies to something like āBurning Heartā. That was bizarre and is still relatively unknown, so it was fun to tackle.
Also slightly depressing to see that review has no likes, and I worked really hard on that one - stings a lot more seeing that with book reviews cause they are so time-consuming
I find it easier to review stories if thereās something for me to criticise. Things to praise are a bit more difficult to review, but stories that donāt really do much are the hardest, I agree. How are you supposed to talk about something if thereās not much there?
This is why many of my reviews go off on random tangents. I know some people arenāt big fans of this style, but I much prefer it to people just going āthing is good / badā
Adding to this, as a non-native English speaker, I often find it difficult to find different words to praise things with. Relying on the same āitās good/great/fantastic/impressive/superbā, etc., feels so clumsy.
Praising great stories in definitely a lot harder than criticising bad ones - and the latter can be quite cathartic if a story really hasnāt impressed you.
That said, I get a real buzz out of writing a review which is hugely positive about stories that people seem to dislike a lot. Some of the favourite reviews Iāve written have been for The Doctor, the Widow and the Wardrobe, The Celestial Toymaker and, surprise surprise, Delta and the Bannermen.
I would honestly agree with that.
I remember sharing two reviews Iād written for stories that have been unanimously panned in the past - though one has become something of a cult classic in recent years - in my Discord server.
Some of my friends were left pretty shocked that I gave āThe Raptureā and āDreamtimeā such high scores!
I fully admit that I went into āThe Raptureā with bias - because all hail the Cult of āJoe Lidster is the greatest writer, because I said so, shut upā 
As for āDreamtimeā - quite possibly one of the most panned stories in the Monthly Range - I really appreciate that it made me go out and do some research into Aboriginal culture.
I had this great ASMR video discussing the Dreaming that story is based around, and discussing all the creatures that appear. Was fascinating!
Honestly my biggest struggle with reviews is remembering wtf even happened in any given episode. Unless I review it straightaway, it often fades very quickly from my mind and then I have no idea what to say
I will spend time writing up a review and getting all my feelings out. I will read over it and then feel good about it, make some changes, at least try to clean it up a bit, and so on. Then Iāll post it and start to get out of writing mode just as I realize there was some key aspect of the episode I wanted to talk about that I forgot completely 
So I honestly have the exact same issue, but thatās why I developed a strategy for writing my reviews.
After listening to the story for the first time - or the first time in ages, if itās one Iāve owned for several years and only recently decided to revisit - Iāll write my score down on a post-it note, like the one at the beginning of this thread, and put it into TardisGuide at the first opportunity.
When Iām actually sitting down to write my reviews, Iāll actually relisten to the story twice in the background.
The first time Iāll jot down all the bits and pieces of interesting characterisation the episode throws at me. The second time Iāll be discussing the ideas and delving into music / sound design.
Obviously, not everyone has time to do that, but Iāve found thatās what works best for me personally in the nearly four years Iāve been writing reviews.
Iām supposed to be reviewing Demons of the Punjab for my blog/the site but watched it about two weeks ago and still havenāt started. Itās my worst habit with writing reviews.
That is a whole lot smarter and more organised than what I do when reviewing an audio, which is listen to it and then pray.
I find the main strategy that works for me is to not take on any more than two reviews at once, preferably only one at a time. I usually wonāt listen to the next part in a series if Iām planning to review the previous entry until Iāve actually reviewed it.
I would love to have that kind of time, but I just donāt Plus, when I get going I can listen to four or five MR stories in a day depending on what Iām doing lmao I just listen way faster than I can write. I try to take notes sometimes but thatās kind of hard when youāre sewing 
And itās sad that Tardis Wiki stops having plot summaries in the later MR stories so Iām completely lost there too haha. If I had the time, Iād love to start writing summaries out over there too. But alas, there are not that many hours in the day
