Review writing is based on a basic idea: "What is it? Is it any good?"
Reviewing a CD, a book, a work of art, live performance (or anything else) is to tell the readers/listeners about an objective experiences of with a specific piece of art from a person that is a specialist in the area. “Readers want a SERVICE and do not really care what you think of whatever it is.”
The question in the reader's mind is "does it do what it says on the tin?"
Unfortunately GONZO (which is good in its place) has crept into reviewing, with many reviewers using it as yet another opportunity to show off in a way. These sometimes does not go beyond the reviewers own personal preferences and reaction to the work. This is no good for professional journalism.
Contrast with the highly professional reviews in Sight and Sound magazine (British Film Institute). This magazine is written for an expert audience. The magazine reviews every new release. The review style here is absolutely classic as you can see from this typical and unexceptional example. The magazine actually separates the "what is it" from "is it any good" typographically. It starts with a summary of what the film is about (synopsis) - who the actors are, how long it is and so on. It then goes on to pass a (balance and informed) opinion on whether the film achieves what it has apparently set out to do.
Another elaboration on this basic format is the FEATURE REVIEW which involves reviewing a clutch of products under a single heading - eg young British film-makers; eg - all recent productions of the Magic Flute around the world. This sort of "Feature Review" - supposedly detecting a new trend in culture" can be played very big in the arts/culture sections of newspapers and magazines.
Unfortunately GONZO (which is good in its place) has crept into reviewing, with many reviewers using it as yet another opportunity to show off in a way. These sometimes does not go beyond the reviewers own personal preferences and reaction to the work. This is no good for professional journalism.
Contrast with the highly professional reviews in Sight and Sound magazine (British Film Institute). This magazine is written for an expert audience. The magazine reviews every new release. The review style here is absolutely classic as you can see from this typical and unexceptional example. The magazine actually separates the "what is it" from "is it any good" typographically. It starts with a summary of what the film is about (synopsis) - who the actors are, how long it is and so on. It then goes on to pass a (balance and informed) opinion on whether the film achieves what it has apparently set out to do.
Another elaboration on this basic format is the FEATURE REVIEW which involves reviewing a clutch of products under a single heading - eg young British film-makers; eg - all recent productions of the Magic Flute around the world. This sort of "Feature Review" - supposedly detecting a new trend in culture" can be played very big in the arts/culture sections of newspapers and magazines.
Many reviewers are freelancers or experts in their own field who are doing the reviews in their spare time.
CONSUMER REVIEWS are another type of Reviews- they evaluate products for readers and follow the same sort of format to Art Review.
