One of the reasons I don’t really like reviews (of movies, music, books, etc.) is that often, these reviews are done by people looking to “out”-review everyone else. They focus on the uber details, the technical stuff, bla bla bla. It’s like academic articles – written for other eggheads in an attempt to show how smart the writer is. (Incidentally, this is also one of the reasons I decided not to pursue a promising research career – I’m not interested in writing for the ivory tower with no benefit to the wider society).
Art is art – what’s important to me is how it makes me feel. If I see a film/ play/painting/photograph/show, if I read a book, if I listen to a song and it inspires me, that’s good enough for me. Indeed, I like the little imperfections that come with art. The more technically polished something is, the more distant I feel from it. I like my art like I like my people, clothes, and cars – rusty, wrinkled, dented, scruffy.
Of course, I understand why others like to write and read these reviews, if they place a high level of importance on those things that I don’t really care about. To each their own.
But when I write about books, movies or tv , music, or concerts , I call them non-reviews, because I’m not so much reviewing the quality of the writing, the acting, the lighting, or any other technical things as I am reacting to how this particular piece of art made me feel. And generally, if I’m moved enough to write about something, it’s because I’m nowhere near indifferent. And that is almost always a good thing!