There isn’t really enough here that illustrates your aesthetic theory to allow me to respond well.

If you are suggesting that some critics have “better opinions” then I’d basically reject that conception outright. Here I would reference Howard Moscowitz’s theory and practical engineering of tastes to suit different audiences.

If you’re suggesting a trained reviewer can better connect and convey the artist benefit of a work to those who would appreciate those aspects, then I completely agree, but it’s just that we are talking about one specific audience being served that is not easily served, not audiences in general.

If you’re talking about the pleasantness and prose of the written reviews themselves, we end up in a meta-discussion of the aesthetics of review writing.