Quotes About Review

You can learn a lot from criticism if you can take what's constructive out of it. If you read a review that starts with, 'This person is an idiot; who do they think they are?', you're not going to learn anything from that.

A good review from the critics is just another stay of execution.

If during the review of a corporation's books, the accountant has reason to believe that the company may go bankrupt, he must issue a "qualified opinion" stating the potential of the company's demise. More on this concept later.

To Jacob, the act of critiquing art was essentially imprecise. That's why he didn't read reviews on anything he liked, be it a book, a movie, or a record. He believed that any work an artist puts forth which contains the truth as he or she sees it is worthy of consideration, and any commentary of the work beyond that is nothing more than pure individual opinion and should not be considered relevant to the work itself.

The most noble criticism is that in which the critic is not the antagonist so much as the rival of the author.

Sometimes you look at the critics and say, 'Nobody else was telling me that, but you were.'

I never read a book I must review; it prejudices you so.

If you wanted your bug fixed, you should really check it in depth.

So, she merely remarked that it would make an excellent article for the North American Review. In other words, she praised it and at the same time subtly suggested that it wouldn't do as a speech. Lyman Abbott saw the point

Marking and underscoring a book makes it more interesting, and far easier to review rapidly.

Re-examine all that you have been told.

Any inhabitant with a negative attachment coefficient (in which case it is referred to as a coefficient of ironic detachment) will be placed on probation pending review of the individual's suitability for continued inclusion within the U31 diegetic space.

strategic-issue reviews are organized around "facts, alternatives, and choices.

If a writer I represent gets a bad or unfair review, I suffer. I'm upset and outraged and do everything I can to try and change that. But I would never do that on behalf of my own book because I wouldn't expect my writers to do that.

Once a week, do a thorough review of all your projects in as much detail as you need to. If you do, your systems will work. If you don't, no system will work.

If you re-read your work, you can find on re-reading a great deal of repetition can be avoided by re-reading and editing.

Even the finest workman needs to inspect his work critically.

For someone who's had the level of success I've had, there's been very little critical review of my work, which is pretty fascinating.

We've played on 'Saturday Night Live' and got not even a Rolling Stone review.

Let's find out what everyone is doing, And then stop everyone from doing it.

'Under the Skin' is handsome, in a dour way, but inert - a cunning experiment that died in the shooting or on the editing table. You'll want to get the DVD, though, and not just for its study of Scarlett. Odds are that the Making-Of documentary will be far stranger and more fascinating than the movie that was made.

The review I've been most offended by came when I played Hamlet. I'd always prided myself on being an 'invisible actor' and not getting in the way of the play. But this review didn't mention me once. That's worse than being insulted.

There was one time I flagged every 'Brokeback Mountain' review on Netflix that was negative. I was, like, 'not helpful,' and I spent, like, an hour doing it, and I wrote a really serious review about it. It's hard for me not to get really sensitive. I don't brush things off like that very easily.

I tend not to look at my work after I've done it. In fact, the only time I typically get to review it is when the fans bring up comics at shows, and I kind of flip through it and be like, 'Oh, I remember doing this!'