One-Star Revue: (Not So) GREAT EXPECTATIONS

Tomorrow is the 200th anniversary of the birth of Charles Dickens. (Just telling you now so you still have time to rush out and get a present.) Although he tended to the verbose -- a natural output of being paid by quantity and not quality -- and he never met a character he didn't love to excess, Dickens is considered a master of Brit-lit. If you haven't already been bowled over by articles "revisiting" Dickens in his context, you will be this year. He was a devoted spouse! He never got over his dad! He was the first fighter for social justice (or was he...) 

Just to clarify, these disgruntled comments would not count as revisionist takes on the great man's legacy:

• "This book might be interesting to someone chained to a palm tree on a deserted island."
• "Dickens did not seem to know really what he wanted to do with the plot. He even made two endings!!!"
• "I just wish I could ask the dead author some questions like Why didn't you let Pip grow the Hell up? That poor me, I'm a country peasant with no friends act got real tired real quick."
• "This story has no meaning and Charles Dickens is going no where with this."
• "How can those women be so cold-hearted? That's probably why Miss Havisham got burned in the first place. I bet her heart was cooled off after that."
• "By far the worst literary blunder the world has ever excreted. I would never wish this horific [sic] mass of boredom upon anyone. Avoid this book like the black plauge [sic] (another one of Europe's tragedies)."
• "In terms of food, it could have used a bit more seasoning, like a trip to Denmark. Of course, they didn't actually go to Denmark. If instead of being named "Magwitch" the convict had been called Bozo the Clown, and gave Pip balloon animals instead of money, I would have enjoyed the book much more."
• "ZZZZZZZ SNOOZE ZZZZZZZ!!!!!!!"