Why no one mentions artwork in reviews, or that reviews should take less time to read than the comic?

I think some reviewers do mention art, although I think there’s a sort of rift in the comic community between people who are concerned mostly with the art in books, and idolize artists mainly and those on the flip side who are concerned more with the writing and the writer.
That they’re both significantly important and shouldn’t be looked at separately is something i think we gloss over too much. Bad art belies good writing, and bad writing belies good art.

ALSO:
On how long it takes to review things.
Have you ever read an Emily Dickinson poem, Matchesmalone?
Many of them are quite short, but I’m sure you’d agree that spending one minute and thirty seven seconds reviewing a poem full of allusion, imagery, and all such literary things could not do a good poem justice.
It’s a little different with comic books, sure. But take this into consideration. Due to the fact that comic books are an amalgamation of sequential art with dialog and often times narration it’s very easy to plow through most action/plot/event oriented comic books. This happens, then that happens. WHAM, BAM, thank you, ma’am.
And yeah, that takes very little time. But do you go back and reread conversations? Analyze panels, characters expression?
There’s a lot to look at and contemplate in a single issue, and what’s more is that series, or stories taking place in a larger context (or universe) can often be viewed from different points as well. How does the story stand on its own? What does it do to move the plot or affect the readers knowledge and awareness of the bigger picture/story/universe?

Ok, I’m rambling. I’ll stop now.

I’m also amazed at how many reviews don’t even mention the artwork.