So I'm acquainted with the world of critical review.

I find that shorter book reviews are more intelligent, generally. They have to cut to the chase. Two to three paragraphs is optimal for a review. I have reviewers whose judgment I trust because I have then read the books, or read the books first sometimes, and the reviews rang true.

Theater and movie reviews have more of a reason to be long. The reviewer needs to consider the script, the direction, and the individual performances, and sometimes the cinematography and the soundtrack merit special mention.

You're right when you say that, the longer and more inflated the review, the more it's about the reviewer. It's not really fair to the author to judge him by his reviewers. Not really.

That's why I haunt bookstores. There's nothing like reading the book, or even part of the book. I'll pick up a book because I've seen a review, but I can't stand to base all my selections (especially for the library) on reviews alone. We often read based on our reactions, positive and negative, to other people's opinions as it is. To depend on the reviewing profession exclusively is to narrow that set of reactive reading more and more.

If you see an inflated review, please remember that the author has no control over his reviewers.