[geophile]

As the comments all over this thread demonstrate, code review is done for many reasons. Where I've worked, the reasons have not been clearly stated, and as a result there is a lot of time wasted. I wouldn't say that there should not be code reviews, but they could be cut way down. A code review should not be a substitute for a design review. It often is, in my experience. A code review should not be done for anything that can be done by static code analysis: code style, finding dead code, etc.

Also, a lot depends on how code reviews are done. I've seen them used as a veto, with lots of back and forth to get the veto removed over subjective and trivial issues. Don't do that.

Finally, let's be honest. Some people's code doesn't need review. Time spent reviewing such code is wasted. But it is often socially difficult to say this, so everyone's code gets reviewed.

Other people can't be trusted to write acceptable code, and reviews are essential. That's a different problem. (Beyond the scope of this note. Left as an exercise to the reader. Other cliches may apply.)