This malaise is common amongst GA aircraft. Checks are written by people who are either trying to sell checklists and feel they have to give value for money by making the lists long, or instructors who want to be airline pilots and think they need to make them complex because they want to fly complex aircraft.
And of course, the manufacturer will produce a checklist when he builds the aircraft, but lets not evn go there! Suffice to say the list produced by Aerospatiale for the Rallye I used to own was written by someone from Mars!
The RAF used to have generic checks which covered nearly all aircraft from Magister to the Spitfire - with a few modifications. I used to fly the Chipmunk in the RAF and they still work for most of the GA aircraft I fly now.
I now fly the 744 for a living, the checks cover two sides of A4. In typical Boeing fashion, they are succint - covering the essentials. I also instruct on two variants of PA28 at a local club. The CFI re-wrote the checks to cover both models. They are simplicity itself and there are no superfluous actions. But they are still longer than the 744s!
IMHO, The lesson for students should be 'follow the lists, but maintain the big picture'. What do I mean? - Well, know the checks (learning them saves time and money and also prevents fingers slipping, missing a line and a vital action) - and don't rely on them to the extent that if you forget to do a list, you don't do something stupid like land with the wheels up.
This last comment sounds a bit flippant, but what I do is when I line up, I check the flaps are in the correct place, the pitot heater is on and I know what the clearance is. At about 400' on the approach, I check Reds (mixture), Blues (RPM), Greens (wheels), Flaps and Clearance. This are extra to the checks, but the things that are going to embarrass or even kill you if missed. I teach my students to do the same - even on simple types, based on the premis that they may fly complex aircraft in the future.
It's an airmanship thing!