Why the epic reviews?

[Neville]

If you don't like to read, I don't know what you are doing here. And what do you mean reading is for losers? To hell with with you, you ignorant scumbag!! Do yourself a favour and read yourself a book, if possible something that is not the TV Guide.

[Neville]

About the reviews, I think their lenght is perfectly adequate. Actually, I don't mind reading even Jabootu's longest articles. Lenght is never a problem if you are interested on the topic and writing is good, and if anybody feels there's too much to read, they can always jump to the pictures or the "Things I learned..." section.

[J.R.]

I'm joking about reading being for losers. I just don't think movie reviews should be so long, since the purpose for such an article is to give a vague overview of the plot and whether or not the particular reviewer likes or dislikes the film in question.

[Nathan]

I just don't think movie reviews should be so long, since the purpose for such an article is to give a vague overview of the plot and whether or not the particular reviewer likes or dislikes the film in question.

But obviously that's NOT the purpose of longer reviews.  Again, look at Ken Begg; his purpose is definitely NOT a vague overview of the plot.  We've all got purposes in what we write, and it may not line up with what you think reviews "should" be.

Me, I try to get my reviews up to around 1500 words -- longer, if it works.  If that's longer than the movie reviews you see in your local paper, so be it; I'm not writing in your local paper.

Nathan