There is always a thin line between a critique and a review. Most would even say that there is no difference at all. Some however have the knowledge to discern whether a written or spoken comment about anything that was presented is either form a critic or a reviewer.
What is the difference between a comment and a review?
If looked at from the point of view of the writer, a critic is someone who has dedicated a great number of his or her time in order to master a specific area of expertise. The critic could have had the genre as his or her major in college or has given a contribution to it. A reviewer on the other hand is from a person who formed an interest to the certain topic and had the liberty of voicing out his or her thoughts.
A critic is a more reliable source than a reviewer.
In terms of the message of the two, there is also a great difference that makes a critique distinguishable from a review. Reviews are presented with the overall impression of the work in question. The comments are expressed not by looking at each unit but as how the whole system worked together.
"The performers of the Broadway musical were very entertaining"
In a critique however, specific points are pointed out. It is deeper analyzed, looked at from every point of view and justified on how the overall result had become. This is through the individual evaluation of each unit.
"The clean transition from one setting to the next avoided lapses and therefore prevented the audience form boredom"
Although a critique may seem to be a better choice for people to read before viewing or purchasing something, there is a reason why other people would prefer to go for a review. It is because reviews are perfect people who are there not as experts but to just experience something as a normal individual.
Visit Enzo Toledo and discern whether the articles located there are critiques or reviews.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Enzo_Emmanuel_Toledo
