Well he's right, in that it is a lengthy book (and it does repeat itself sometimes).
It just seems like he isn't really that taken with the narrative of the story's development over the years, which personally, even though I think of myself as very well versed in the lore of it all, I thought was fantastic and very insightful, not to mention entertaining. And also he just doesn't seem to like the painstaking forensic approach Michael took, which to me is the very reason the book is so compelling.