The logical flow of this argument seems to me as following. 1)The review rates are high, so the quality is good enough. 2) Fewer number of people has attended movies last year; therefore, they do not know about the movies. 3) Since they do not know about our movies, while they are of high quality, we should advertise more. This arquments, however, is not well supported and there are myriad questions which need to be answered before taking any measure.
First, the mere fact that the percentage of positive reveiws about specific movies has increased last year is not an indication of their high qualities. Although the percentage has increaced, it is possible that the total number of people who think their product are well-produced has increased. Moreover, the percentage is about specific products, not all. There is a chance that while people think those specific movies are of good quality, other products have been inferior than all movies produced that year. In order to decide wether or not the quality of the movies have been good enough, I need to know the number of people who were asked. Moreover, the reviewers should be asked about all the movies of this company as well as those of other companies.
Secondly, the fact that the number of people atteded the Super Screen(SS) movies has decreased does no proof that they are not aware of the SSs' procucts. In fact, the decline might have been the result of other factors. For exmaple during that specific year there may have been a special event like workd-cup or olympics, and people may have been busy with these events. It is also possible that people have had a severe financial problem, and they had to work and they have not enough time and money to attend. Moreover, people may have prefered to watch these products in their home rather than going to cinemas simply because the equipment available at home has became more effictive and convinient. Before making any decision, I need to know if there has been specific reasons that fewer people have attended to cinemas and how many individuals have watched these movies in their homes.
Finally, even if the quality is good enough and the reason that people do not attend their movies is because that they do not know about these products, it does not mean that they should increace the budget. The budget for advertising may be good, but they are not effective, and they should simply change the way they advertise. Therefore, I need to know how effective their methods of advetising are.
- As we acquire more knowledge, things do not become more comprehensible, but more complex and mysterious 50
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 75
- Claim: In any field—business, politics, education, government—those in power should step down after five years.Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership. 16
- According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any other year. And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies a 66
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 478, Rule ID: SUPERIOR_THAN[1]
Message: The adjective inferior is normally used with 'to'.
Suggestion: to
...lity, other products have been inferior than all movies produced that year. In order...
^^^^
Line 5, column 664, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'become'.
Suggestion: become
...use the equipment available at home has became more effictive and convinient. Before m...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, while, in fact, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 47.0 28.8173652695 163% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 16.3942115768 18% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2084.0 2260.96107784 92% => OK
No of words: 434.0 441.139720559 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.80184331797 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56428161445 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.326896911 2.78398813304 84% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.456221198157 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 651.6 705.55239521 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.1407974554 57.8364921388 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.2 119.503703932 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7 23.324526521 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.70786347227 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0448097385298 0.218282227539 21% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0155979718861 0.0743258471296 21% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0214324905041 0.0701772020484 31% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0322591925961 0.128457276422 25% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00839472620611 0.0628817314937 13% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 14.3799401198 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.3550499002 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.56 12.5979740519 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.88 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 98.500998004 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 12.3882235529 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.