Eric Grode review of “Richard II,” “A King’s Verse Fails to Prevent His Decline,” is a wonderful example of what not to do when critiqueing something. Grode fails to go into any detail when describing the show or the performance of the actors. He uses terms like “silver-tongued” and “lead-footed” but does not support these claims with the instances where he felt they were appropriate. He compliments the lead actor, Sean McNall, on his voice and body type being well-suited for his role as King Richard II. He summarizes the show in a loosely woven metaphor that attempts to compare the show to someone finding a genie in a lamp and making his first two wishes before realizing there is no third. After thinking about it, I still haven’t the slightest clue what this means and it would be in his best interest to at least clarify this metaphor with a more realistic description. He also notes that another actor, Chris Mixon, “strikes some enjoyably loathsome notes”and makes strong impressions as a man of conscience.” This is all he says about Mixon and it is laughable that anyone would consider this as a “review.” The entire review appears written in haste and fails to expound upon the Grode’s visible dislike of the show. The bottom line is that a review is not just a critic saying something was good or bad, detailed reasons must be given.