Super Screen
In this argument, the author recommends that the Super Screen should devote more financial budget into advertising, to effectively promulgate their movies to the public. To justify this conclusion, the author points out the facts that fewer people watched Super Screen movies last year while more positive reviews of particular movies increased. Furthermore, he or she assumes that the reason is the lack of awareness of good quality among prospective viewers. It seems convincing at first glance. However, with some implicit holes and some unanswered questions, this argument may be not strong enough to lead to the previous recommendation.
First, what is the exact amount of positive reviewers last year? The author failed to provide more reliable evidence regarding the numbers of reviewers who wrote positive reviews, to make a comparison with the number of people who attended their movies. If the latter are far more than the former, this means that the increase of positive reviewers are meaningless compared with the total number. Perhaps there were only less than 100 people who liked to watch some specific movies. This level of increasing number cannot be regarded as a factor to measure whether these movies are more popular. Therefore the author ought to provide more evidence to answer this essential question. If not, this reason may not convince me.
Second, even though there a big number of positive reviewers increasing last year, what is proportion of people among total number who are really like the movies? Perhaps they are satisfied with the service of the cinema or they just feel that the seat make them comfortable, I will safely assumes that they will be willing to give a positive reviews to this enjoyable experience. So, if the author provide more evidences to persuade me that they are really attractive with the movies rather other environment issues, I will be more convinced.
Finally, what is the reason why these positive reviewers didn't attend other movies? Just because they didn't know them? Close analysis of the author's assumption, he or she may think so. But it may be less possible that these movie fans didn't aware the other movies while they had attended specific movies. On the contrary, it is more likely that they were reluctant to watch other movies for some reasons, maybe too boring or bad skills of directing. So, if the author can make me convinced that these people didn't aware them so they overlooked some of them, this argument will be significantly strengthened.
To sum up, as I pointed out before, the argument is based on the lacking of certain unanswered questions and unwarranted assumptions. To bolster this argument, the author might provide more evidence regarding the real reviews about movies by these fans and their exact number, as well as the reason why they didn't attend other movies. Maybe doing a research is good choice for the cinema company.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-01 | Mahima1902 | 50 | view |
| 2023-08-29 | Eurus Psycho Version | 55 | view |
| 2023-08-21 | riyarmy | 54 | view |
| 2023-08-14 | Saket Choudhary | 68 | view |
| 2023-08-13 | Fahim Shahriar Khan | 58 | view |
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 487 350
No. of Characters: 2385 1500
No. of Different Words: 223 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.698 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.897 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.473 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 181 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 112 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 81 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 48 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.292 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.609 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.305 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.486 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.095 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 597, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
... whether these movies are more popular. Therefore the author ought to provide more eviden...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 291, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'assume'
Suggestion: assume
...at make them comfortable, I will safely assumes that they will be willing to give a pos...
^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 58, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...the reason why these positive reviewers didnt attend other movies? Just because they ...
^^^^^
Line 13, column 103, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
... attend other movies? Just because they didnt know them? Close analysis of the author...
^^^^^
Line 13, column 142, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... didnt know them? Close analysis of the authors assumption, he or she may think so. But...
^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 236, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
... be less possible that these movie fans didnt aware the other movies while they had a...
^^^^^
Line 13, column 509, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...can make me convinced that these people didnt aware them so they overlooked some of t...
^^^^^
Line 17, column 309, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
... number, as well as the reason why they didnt attend other movies. Maybe doing a rese...
^^^^^
Line 17, column 348, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[1]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'research'.
Suggestion: research
... didnt attend other movies. Maybe doing a research is good choice for the cinema company. ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, look, may, really, regarding, second, so, then, therefore, well, while, as well as, on the contrary, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 54.0 28.8173652695 187% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2457.0 2260.96107784 109% => OK
No of words: 482.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09751037344 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68556276237 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54499039675 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 229.0 204.123752495 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.47510373444 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 767.7 705.55239521 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 4.96107784431 222% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.7786092771 57.8364921388 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.375 119.503703932 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0833333333 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.54166666667 5.70786347227 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 5.25449101796 171% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 8.20758483034 183% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => 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: 0.0550159683893 0.218282227539 25% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0189046300533 0.0743258471296 25% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0628935877526 0.0701772020484 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.041502631305 0.128457276422 32% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.08300526261 0.0628817314937 132% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.0 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 98.500998004 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.