Originally posted by hengcs
Nothing personal, but to me, a lot of reviews are
-- predominantly plagued with "summary"/"narration" of the film

I agree. Most reviews concern themselves primarily with answers to the question: Well, what is it about? and privilege storytelling over everything else that cinema can potentially offer. A lot of reviews of movies read like reviews of books or plays. I think this is true of folks who actually get payed and published. Many are unfamiliar with the medium, might not know what a pan or a dissolve is, would struggle to properly describe a scene (granted, it's not easy to do). I propose that many reviewers familiar with film grammar and syntax are probably discouraged by editors who fear alienating the readership.
On the other hand, I often find these "plot-plagued" reviews help me recall visual memories of movies I watched some time ago. I do think it's important for a review to include at least a description of the premise, but a detailed plot summary is not necessary.