the producer 10% princeton review
The given statement is a memo written by a movie producer to head of movie studio citing that, the amount of investment should be increase by 10% for the movie ' Working Title'. The produce states that producer is inexperience, and has only directed in shampoo advertisement. Aditionall, he assert that the producer is taking more time to take a shoot, which is costing more money to producer. Finally, he claims that the investment should be increased. The claims made here by the producer seems convincing but the assumptions are somewhat unwarrented. The following quesions should be addressed to validate the claim.
The producer claims that the director is inexperienced, and will take shots after shots, however it will be illogical to claim that director will not success. There are lots of directors who has succeded in their first attempt. Although, the producer may not be experienced, he may have ideas how to shot a moved, he may could be a certified movie director. May be his precious work in ad
The producer has not cleared about how much money they haved saved by hiring new producers and directors. If they have saved money more then required 10%, than increasing more money seems illogical. So, it should be clear how much money is saved. Also, increasing an investment would not gaurantee success. Previous movies succession or failure is not stated. The movies done by previous experienced directors may could had been failed.
The prodcer has claimed that increasing funding would prevent move from failure. It is also an unwarrented assumption because lots of movie with adequate amount of funding had failed. So, it is not sure that increasing ten percent would movie from failure. If the actors are experienced than the time required would be less and need less time to finish any shot. The actors are experienced or not it should be made clear
In conclusion, we can say that the producer has some flaws in is argument and if he answered the above questions than his argument will be warrented.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-03-16 | himal | 60 | view |
| 2022-04-04 | hattiengaines | 59 | view |
| 2020-05-19 | DC123123 | 61 | view |
| 2020-04-02 | DIRaGoIN | 79 | view |
| 2020-01-21 | mrigimunjal | 35 | view |
- In any situation progress requires discussion among people who have contrasting points of view Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take In devel 60
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Face to face communication is better than other types of communication such as letters e mail or telephone calls Use specific reasons and details to support your answer
- the producer 10 princeton review 60
- Professors are mainly found in university classroom offices libraries doing research lecturing
- Claim Young people s tendency to make extensive use of portable devices like smartphones and tablets has hurt their development of social skills Reason These devices encourage users to form artificial personalities and relationships online rather than ful 60
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 8 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 341 350
No. of Characters: 1636 1500
No. of Different Words: 161 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.297 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.798 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.586 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 109 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 85 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 64 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 36 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 15.5 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.74 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.636 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.291 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.505 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.111 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 131, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'increased'?
Suggestion: increased
...hat, the amount of investment should be increase by 10% for the movie Working Title. T...
^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 160, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... should be increase by 10% for the movie Working Title. The produce states that ...
^^
Line 1, column 291, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'he' must be used with a third-person verb: 'asserts'.
Suggestion: asserts
...n shampoo advertisement. Aditionall, he assert that the producer is taking more time t...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... be addressed to validate the claim. The producer claims that the director is in...
^^^
Line 5, column 137, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[2]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...irectors. If they have saved money more then required 10%, than increasing more mone...
^^^^
Line 5, column 317, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'movies'' or 'movie's'?
Suggestion: movies'; movie's
...t would not gaurantee success. Previous movies succession or failure is not stated. Th...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 421, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'have'
Suggestion: have
...revious experienced directors may could had been failed. The prodcer has claimed...
^^^
Line 7, column 127, Rule ID: LOTS_OF_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun movie seems to be countable; consider using: 'lots of movies'.
Suggestion: lots of movies
... also an unwarrented assumption because lots of movie with adequate amount of funding had fai...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, so, then, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.9520958084 170% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 55.5748502994 50% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1689.0 2260.96107784 75% => OK
No of words: 341.0 441.139720559 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.95307917889 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29722995808 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6886298375 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 204.123752495 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.492668621701 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 515.7 705.55239521 73% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.6186285561 57.8364921388 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 84.45 119.503703932 71% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.05 23.324526521 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.4 5.70786347227 60% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.128522490876 0.218282227539 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.040292367669 0.0743258471296 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0535423684901 0.0701772020484 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.075745494368 0.128457276422 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0559537761673 0.0628817314937 89% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.4 14.3799401198 72% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 48.3550499002 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 12.197005988 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.13 12.5979740519 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.0 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 98.500998004 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.