I happened to sit next to some BSR subscribers at a Fringe show last weekend, and they wanted to know why (as often happens during a festival) we sometimes run reviews of shows that have only a couple of performances. Why publish a review if the reader can't get to the show?
Some outlets may run reviews solely with the goal of delivering an opinion on the work and telling readers whether or not to attend. But reviews can do so much more. They're a first-person record of an ephemeral art form at the forefront of our social and political currents. Over time, reviews create a lively independent history of our stages and how we respond to them.
They're also especially important to emerging artists, introducing their work to a wider community and letting audiences know to look out for what the artists are doing next. Many independent artists can't afford to rent and staff a venue for an extended run, but that doesn't mean their work isn't worth consideration in the press. Reviews can also place creators and critics in a dialogue that benefits everyone as nascent works (especially common in a festival setting) deepen and evolve.
TL/DR: reviews are an important contemporary and historical portrait of a moment in the arts, like a Fringe Festival. That's why we're bringing you a wide range of shows! Many are running through this weekend and beyond.