What I want to know is: Why the FUCK does a reviewer seem to find it to be a requirement of his or her damned job to spoil pretty much the whole plot (granted, with a Gaiman book there's still going to be a lot going on under the surface.. but still!) as a "review"? The hell?
It wouldn't be as much of a peeve if it weren't so common in general to just tell more and more of the plot for various blurbs (comics, movies, books, what have you). And it REALLY PISSES ME OFF. *pant pant*
I mean, it would be at least somewhat excuseable if it were a reader review, and said reader just hadn't twigged onto just how to do reviews, how much of the story to spill, etc... but these are professional gods-damned reviewers, doing their job. So why do they do it so poorly?
Here's a hint guys: I want a hint of the story given to me, an idea of the genre, set-up, etc., so I know if it's something that might appeal to me. I do not want the entire plot more or less handed to me on a silver platter. *fume*
(And damnit... I really need a pissed/annoyed icon, don't I? Oh well, I'll just use the one with the sword. Which I would like to be using right now.)