Why was this review declined (twice)?

Below is the second version of a review I wrote for AGORA. I have over 250 film reviews on IMDb. 

I am struggling to understand what about this review does not meet IMDb guidelines. Would anyone be kind enough to tell me? 

____
Title of Review: Someone's wild dream that disintegrated

We struggled to watch this film and managed to get through about 60% of it. We must have seen the trailer and thought, "Oh, this looks interesting." What it was, however, was a really sad waste of money. Money that could have been given to charities or to build shelters for the homeless, or to offer scholarships to those deserving. Instead, "Agora" shows what Alexandria may have looked like in 391 AD in incredible detail. It was spectacular, hence the two stars. It was as if "Spartacus" and "Cleopatra" had a child and gave it everything it wanted.

Rachel Weisz is a fine actress. I have enjoyed her in any number of films. But as soon as "Agora" starts, it's fairly clear that something is terribly wrong, despite Weisz's presence: tons of unnecessary scenes, their purpose apparently to make one point; errant cutaways to the "cosmos;" a scene of several of the characters (men) utilizing the open-air public restroom; lots of horrific violence, death, dismemberment, burning of corpses, and other fun stuff that would make most people ill.

The concept for "Agora," about the destruction of the great library of Alexandria and the clash of the Christians, the Jews and the pagans, was certainly a fascinating one. The execution of it is disastrous. The script seems stilted and Rachel, while committed, is saying things only because she's being paid to say them. There were several "classroom" scenes where Rachel, as Hypatia, the daughter of Theon, the director of the Museum of Alexandria, teaches young men about science -- I guess. The scenes were lifeless. All I could think about was the amount of money that was wasted on this production, the insane number of extras that were hired, the fact that all those people needed to eat and be clothed and have restroom facilities. I thought this kind of toga romance epic went out of style in the 1960s. Apparently not.

The thing is: it looks like an entire city was built to resemble Alexandria. The library is unbelievable. The number of scrolls, the vastness of it, the fresco on the ceiling, everything. It was all utterly amazing... and then all of it was destroyed. It was really sad to see that someone had obviously spent God-knows how long to recreate the city of Alexandria, only to have it reduced to rubble by righteous religious zealots.

The great thing about this movie is that it should be a lesson to anyone who wants to write a screenplay or produce a film: If you have too many characters, the audience will not know where its loyalty should lie; if you have too many storylines, the audience will struggle to maintain focus; if you start talking in philosophical circles for any length of time, the audience will turn you off.

I really wanted to give it a chance, but, except for the amazing recreations, the astonishing statues, and a hint of the magnificence of what Alexandria was (and could have been), what this movie showed/proved (and maybe that was its goal) is how stupid people were and continue to be, and how little we've learned in thousands of years of recorded history.