A movie producer sent the following memo to the head of the movie studio.
"We need to increase the funding for the movie Working Title by 10% in order to ensure a quality product. As you know, we are working with a first-time director, whose only previous experience has been shooting commercials for a shampoo company. Since the advertising business is notoriously wasteful, it stands to reason that our director will expect to be able to shoot take after take, without concern for how much time is being spent on any one scene. In addition, while we have saved money by hiring relatively inexperienced assistant producers and directors, this savings in salary will undoubtedly translate to greater expenditures in paying the actors and unionized crew overtime for the extra hours they will spend on the set waiting for the assistant directors and producers to arrange things. If we don't get this extra money, the movie is virtually assured to be a failure."
Movie producer claims that movie would fail if funding is not increased by 10%. Producer assumes that director whose only previous job experience was shooting a shampoo commercial would be successful in making a quality product. The producer actually fails to clearly explain where 10% extra money would be used.
Producer admits extra cost will be involved as director shoots multiple takes of same scene until it's perfected, he also explains how by hiring amateur assistant producers and director he will save some money and utilize this money in paying the actors and crew for extra time they spend on the sets. Since this expenditure is taken care of he doesn't explain where 10% extra funding will be spent.
Whole of the movie team including director, assistant director and assitant producer are inexperienced. Producer doesn't really explain credibilty or talent of the team. There is no single supporting evidence to assert that team would be successful in bringing out good movie if funding is increased by 10%. All that producer says that movie will be failure if funding is not received, he never mentions movie would be a hit if funding is received.
Since the producer fails to clearly explain how the extra 10% would be spent and also assume amateur team is fully capable of bringing out quality movie without any assurance on their talent, head of the studio may not be fully convinced to increase the funding.
- We learn our most valuable lessons in life from struggling with our limitations rather than from enjoying our successes. 50
- A movie producer sent the following memo to the head of the movie studio."We need to increase the funding for the movie Working Title by 10% in order to ensure a quality product. As you know, we are working with a first-time director, whose only prev 33
- According to a recent report from our marketingdepartment, during the past year, fewer people attendedSuper Screen-produced movies than in any other year.And yet the percentage of positive reviews by moviereviewers about specific Super Screen movies actu 23
- The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and su 50
- 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 302, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Since” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... for extra time they spend on the sets. Since this expenditure is taken care of he do...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 345, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ce this expenditure is taken care of he doesnt explain where 10% extra funding will be...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 114, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...nt producer are inexperienced. Producer doesnt really explain credibilty or talent of ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, if, may, really, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 28.8173652695 49% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 55.5748502994 43% => More preposition wanted.
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: 1195.0 2260.96107784 53% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 239.0 441.139720559 54% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.93187294222 4.56307096286 86% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.43870248918 2.78398813304 88% => OK
Unique words: 128.0 204.123752495 63% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.535564853556 0.468620217663 114% => OK
syllable_count: 367.2 705.55239521 52% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 19.7664670659 51% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.2287179208 57.8364921388 130% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.5 119.503703932 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.9 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.5 5.70786347227 61% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.244533760011 0.218282227539 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.126526251847 0.0743258471296 170% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0837055303719 0.0701772020484 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.168459448511 0.128457276422 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0673970342458 0.0628817314937 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.28 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 98.500998004 54% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 12.3882235529 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum 250 words wanted.
Rates: 33.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 2.0 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.