From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Television (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of television on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Number of episodes produced[edit]

The article claims that 104 episodes were produced in only a 2-year run...does this sound like an awful lot to anyone else? Is there a list of these episodes somewhere? -Grammaticus Repairo 17:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

There are 52 weeks in a year, so if there was an episode released weekly for two years, it would total 104 episodes. Jamesr66a 01:00, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

(NOTE: This section was edited 1/28/08 to remove one user's unnecessary nonsense. I understand that it is not generally considered good practice to refactor or remove other people's talk page comments, but the deleted section was not at all relevant to the discussion, either here or anywhere else on the page.)Gladys J Cortez 17:45, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect, that's exactly the kind of thinking that may well have caused someone to add it to the article as fact in the first place (" was a weekly show and it ran for 2-years, so there must be 104 episodes in all! I'll add that to the article even though I can provide no references whatsoever to support such an assertion..."). On the United States airwaves, one would be hard-pressed to find an example of a weekly television program that airs a new episode (that is, no "repeats") every week during the year. Each "season" (1 year of programs) usually consists of no more than about 24 episodes. It is also my understanding that programs aired in Britain by the BBC have seasons consisting of even fewer episodes (perhaps 10 or less per year). So I find it almost impossible to believe that Boohbah, which obviously took a reasonably substantial amount of production work to make each episode, would have pumped out a new show every week for 104 consecutive weeks.
Can ANYONE provide a source confirming the number of episodes produced during the entire run of the series? -Grammaticus Repairo 06:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Following up, I now see that the number of episodes has been reduced to 65 and the show's run has been extended to 3 years (apparently info from the summmary), so I will withdraw my request for a source, as I don't generally take issue with info from ( is another story, though). -Grammaticus Repairo 06:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, hold on now. On the "sidebar" of the article it lists an episode total of 65, but within the article itself it still says there were 104 episodes. Where are the sources for either? This issue remains unresolved as far as I can tell. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 04:07, August 20, 2007 (UTC)
From the PBS site.. "We needed to shoot 104 stories in a year-and-a-half and it took a day-and-a-half to shoot each episode." However, another page there and another show 65 episodes. Perhaps many more "storyworld" segments were filmed than were actually used in complete episodes? (talk) 15:32, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

It is probably a low budget show anyway... —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)


I agree that this is a weird program, however I have a thirteen month old granddaughter that is crazy about this. I had to do research to make sure that it was ok. She is totally hypnotized when she hears the song Seems like Boohbah is Teletubbies on acid. Bdelisle 08:24, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Someone's done way too many drugs. Seriously, I'm watching this now and I'm freaking scared. I would be interested in finding out where the inspiration for this came from. Orichalcon 07:17, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
True. Very, very true.EunuchOmerta 23:23, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Do you think it's worth exploring in the article? By that I mean the show is completely ridiculous to anyone over the age of 12, moreso than Teletubbies. The whole introducing the family sequence is just beyond nuts. It's like they're TRYING to make it a parody. Fishyfred 09:25, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I happened to see this show for the first time this morning. It came on after Hawaiian Yoga (also pretty weird). I don't know what kids are used to these days, but I'm pretty sure Boohbah would have scared the living shit out of me at age 3. The peculiarity of this show cannot be understated. OBVIOUSLY drug inspired in my opinion. Normally I enjoy watching weird stuff while under the influence, but I think this show would be too much. A vision of hell.

Really? It could have easily sounded like this: "What kind of stimuli do really little children respond to? Well, bright colors, dancing, funny sounds, funny movements, big bright eyes, lights, soft textures... no need for a story line, they wouldn't understand it or follow it anyway, so lets just cut that factor right out. We've got a show!" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 04:11, August 20, 2007 (UTC)

I almost agree. I have a three-year-old brother and he doesn't understand the storyline that much. I mean sure, he must collect bits and pieces of it, but he's not going to recite a general overview of the Spiderman movie. My guess is that adults, or most kids for that matter, should not be watching this show. Even though most kids' shows have makers that seem to realize that grown-ups have to watch this stuff, probably not Boohbah. You will get nightmares after turning one year old. --Walex03. Talking, working, friending. 16:46, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

No green Boohbah[edit]

All the colors of the color wheel are represented except for green. Is there a reason for this?

I'm pretty sure there's no red either. Maybe the creator just didn't like Christmas colours. Orichalcon 12:34, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Yes, there's a red one, his name is Limbah and he is known for his conservative views, his love of cigars and his Oxycontin habit. Stonemason89 (talk) 02:35, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Developmental Value??[edit]

Soceity has learned that children are far more capable than was previously thought. So why are T.V. shows continually dumbing down for them? I don't know much about Anne Wood's background, but it would seem to me that both this show and the Teletubbies attempt to appeal to some visual desire in children without giving any real mental stimulation. They lack themes, storylines, and besides garbled half-speak, they lack language. From what I understand about children's programming, these shows are meant to provide some learning experience to the viewer, but they just don't. Maybe I am too angry about children's television, but children should be able to learn and grow from the experiences tailored toward them. I just know that children should be made to think and use their brains because they are very much able to. If we just create shows and books and other media for children which doesn't ask them to grow then why make it at all? CwH

So what you're saying is that this show is an insult to the viewers' intelligence. I'm sorry, but I don't agree with you. The whole point is to encourage viewers to exercise. I suppose you think this show would be better if it preached about the "evils" of "unhealthy foods"? Look, to put it in perspective, you say this show...and I quote, "doesn't ask them to grow"? I think it does, just in a different way then what you might be used to. Educational TV has many different sides to it. It has many different flavors. This show is just one of those flavors.
I agree. It's all about exercising children's minds, and a programme like this can, by challenging preset ideas and formats, introduce children to the concept of "thinking outside the box." As much as I like it, this programme is about as "outside the box" as kid's TV gets! Paul-b4 12:14, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
This show is hardly educational, nor is it constructive. It is just full of repetitive garbage, just like Teletubbies. Codelyoko193 01:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
My niece, who was three-going-on-four at the time of the following quote, agreed with the above assesments that the show is inappropriate for anyone older than an infant. The two of us were watching an educational TV channel together after I had brought her home from day camp. The "Boohbah" program came on, and she protested, "I don't wanna watch 'Boobah'! That's for babies!" I hadn't known what the program was at the time, but now that I do, I have to agree with her and the above commenters; such programs provide nothing that might stimulate children's intellect, opting instead to lull children with soothing plotless pap, that, if anything, seems more likely to dull their wits. -Jacob (talk) 08:32, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

its probably only meant for children under the age of one, if a child under the age of one sees it there brains will take little notice, a child of two on the other hand may start squeaking at a cat of make a farting noice at a dog because they think that a cat is called a "squeak" and a dog is called "farting noise" because they saw the boobahs call it that


I've never seen a kid begin to exercise as a result of this show. They just sit and zonk out, watching it they same way they do "Teletubbies". That show was tolerable when you got used to it, but "Boobah" is bloody awful. Apparently if they say "it's an exercise show!" they can pipe any junk they want into our homes and it's socially redeeming. Watching a guy attempt to close a door for ten bloody minutes on end is hardly constructive. Sorry - this doesn't help the article at all but I had to let off some steam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

I think the main point of Boohbah is that it encourages farting in public and therefore can lead to the exercise of the bowel movements. That does more good than harm, since that can prevent painful cramps in the stomach area for a long period of time.

        • ABOUT THE ABOVE^****

Hi there, I edited the section "The Boohbahs" earlier to mention that farting and it was erased. I think it should be left there, it's certainly one of their notable characteristics, and I have seen videos of the dolls, which fart too. I changed the bit that says "make noises like squeaks, squeals, and clicks" to say "squeaks, squeals, clicks, and flatulences", which is about as delicate as I could phrase it. I know whoever took it down probably thought I was a vandal, but they DO indeed fart noticeably, and I think it's relevant. The creators of the show put it in there, not me. So I'm going to put it back up, do what you will with it. 06:57, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


"Many people believe it to be a brainwashing program"--Sources? Which particular "many"? (But count me in with the folks who think many, MANY drugs were done during the planning and execution of this program...) Regina0613 00:51, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

This statement is not only unqualified, but seems to be of dubious accuracy and definitely POV. Why is "Boohbah" more of a "brainwashing program" than, say, your average McDonalds advert? I think that someone is being a bit silly. Paul-b4 15:49, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree, this statement must be removed until purged of the weasely words "many people believe" and a source is cited as the basis for this belief.

O my goodness!!! Reading all this has made me think how right you people are! But i do believe that, in writing these comments, that make you a little obsessed yourself. That concludes me to write that this show is most definitely brainwashing!You feel kind of drawn toward them because they're so hilariously disturbing. (talk) 03:18, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Grow up[edit]

I just changed (actually eliminated) all of the unsupported references to drugs that some knucklehead inserted throughout the description of Boohbah. Yes, the show looks trippy. But come on. My kid and I wanted to read about the show, and the drug joke got old really fast. Please don't change it back. Show some respect. 21:57, 30 June 2007 (UTC)Byron in Appleton

Speaking of growing up, I removed the references to genitalia and excrement. Jmbare 17:57, 6 July 2007 (UTC)Joanna in Bethesda
You didn't get everything. And the vandalism didn't stop. I reverted it all the way back to before the drug references got added. This is really childish, I suppose all the vandals are really 3 year olds since they clearly watch the show, so I guess childish is to be expected...... Ariel. 14:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Still, since the notion that the show is apparently popular among stoners and trippers as much as among actual little kids appears to be one of its main claims to fame, shouldnt that deserve at least a mention somewhere? It was pretty much the second thing I ever heard about the show... No-itsme
Not unless you can find a citeable source, like a newspaper article, to say so. AlmostReadytoFly 22:04, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

The "farting"/"flatulence" question...[edit]

...has been dealt with. Closed. Disposed of. Aired-out, if you will. They're not farting. Don't put it back. Gladys J Cortez 14:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

They aren't passing gas? If you are so certain, I assume you have a source/citation where the show's writers or creators make a definitive statement. Please provide the reference, because otherwise I have to agree with the folks who say it is flatulence of some kind. Cheers. (talk) 20:34, 26 December 2009 (UTC) (talk) 23:25, 18 January 2010 (UTC)!

The Boohbahs[edit]

Adolf Hitler? Mao Zedong??? Is this for real, or is someone being a smartass? (I tried verifying at several official websites, but they're all as free of sanity and useful information as all of Anne Woods' creations.) JQ (talk) 22:30, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Haha, yes it was vandalism after all. But I had to ask... JQ (talk) 09:24, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

acid trip?[edit]

In the article, it says that the boohbah's have "acid trip like hallucinations." Is that appropriate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Plot Explanation?[edit]

I couldn't understand the plot before I read this page. Even afterwards, "The purpose of Boohbah is to interact the unseen children with chance to be one with the Boohbahs." didn't help much.

Is it meant to be something like: "The purpose of Boobah is to interact with unseen children who have the chance to be one (with/of) the Boobahs."? Graylocke (talk) 08:38, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


in the article, it lists each of the boohbahs as being played by an actor. these things do not speak, so how can they be played by a human??? (talk) 19:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)!

Silent film actors didn't speak either. It's probably a better word than puppeteer or mime. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 13:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

5 magical atoms[edit]

I think you should keep my edit about the boohbahs being 5 magical atoms of power. I was looking at some of the older versions of the page and found that information on the original version. It was on the official website, so I don't see why it had to be removed. (talk) 01:21, 5 February 2010 (UTC)!


This article has no references! I am displeased. D: Another thing I want to say is this article lacks images. Is there anyone here who is a well-known editor of the Commons to add some Boohbah pictures? If so that would be great, but I'm kind of angry that this article has no reliable sources.

Walex03 (talk) 20:20, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I cited some sources. Hope it helped. Clarinetguy097 (talk) 14:06, 11 November 2012 (UTC)


My brother and sister used to watch this show every day when I was 8-ish and they were 2 and 4. I thought it was the creepiest thing, so I made up a creepy story for it. I told my sister that there used to be an entire civilisation of Boohbahs, and that they all used to be really skinny. Eventually their food supply ran out so they had to resort to cannibalism out of desperation. They ate off the weakest ones until there were only the five strongest ones left and they had enough fat on them to last them the next forty years or so. I told her that when they lose all their fat, they'll eat the weakest/most annoying one out of the five of them (probably Zumbah). I don't think she ever watched it again. I put my theory on the Wikipedia page but they deleted it in under 3 hours. I thought it was pretty valid, and besides, they haven't got any Boohbah history on there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:34, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, you're probably new to Wikipedia. I mean, putting a bullshit story that you made up when you were EIGHT and no reliable sources in the article? No wonder it got removed. Boohbahs are 5 magical atoms of power, as said on their page. Somebody up there also said it. This one is very forced, but makes more sense than a lot of cartoon conspiracy theories. 02:54, 2 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

Asian = Indian =/= Asian (depending on standpoint)[edit]

I find the descriptions of the ethnicity of the Storytellers confusing. In British English, Asian refers to a person of the "Indian sub-Continent", where as Oriental would be a better term for someone of Thai or Japanese decent. Can we just not use their actual ethnicities, rather than having to categorise them in to an ethnic group? I'm pretty sure when comparing a Japanese and Thai person, they racially distinct, just as many peoples from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh vary in specifics of ethnicity. Memsom (talk) 15:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. I reworded it so it's consistent with British usage. Clarinetguy097 (talk) 03:51, 17 May 2014 (UTC)