"According to a recent report by 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 actually increased during the last year. Clearly, the content of these reviews is not reaching enough of our prospective viewers. Thus, the problem lies not in the quality of our movies but with public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available. Super Screen should therefore allocate a greater quantity of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising."
It was stated that fewer people attended Super-Screen-produced movies in the past year and yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie viewers increases during the past year. It could be that those people that watched the movie relate the story or narrate it to other poeple therby when it is time for review, those people that actually see the movie will make a positive review and on the other hand, positive review will also come from the poeple who only get the movie narrated to them. better still we can say those poeple that actually view the movie review it severally thereby making it have multiple review from each person that watch the movie. This will increase the positive ratings.
The fact that the contents of this reviews are not reaching enough prospective viewers might be that there is no enough access to internet facilities by prospective viewers, or these reviews are not available when being access due to poor internet network. Better still, the prospective viewers are not even aware that such movies exist therefore, the need for enough awareness of the Super-Screen-produced movies to prospective viewers as to attract more viewers. The quality of the movie might be excellent but once prospective viewers are not aware of the movie existence, they go for other intrilling movies that are available to them.
There will be some questions to be answered before allocating a greater share of Super Screen budget for advertisement to enable this movie gets to prospective viewers. Does prospective viewers lack the awareness, or prospective viewers are not interested in the movie, or prospective viewers cannot afford the fee in seeing this movie thereby going for other movies with same quality but are cheaper. Prospective viewers too need to consider their pockets when seeing a movie.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-25 | rubelmonir | 16 | view |
| 2023-07-25 | rubelmonir | 60 | view |
| 2023-07-23 | Mizanur_Rahman | 50 | view |
| 2023-02-14 | tedyang777 | 60 | view |
| 2022-11-13 | barath002 | 58 | view |
- According to a recent report by 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 actual 50
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station Over the past year our late night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news During this time period most of the complain 45
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 9 15
No. of Words: 300 350
No. of Characters: 1499 1500
No. of Different Words: 144 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.162 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.997 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.722 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 108 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 71 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 44 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 28 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 33.333 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 21.746 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.444 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.455 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.455 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.203 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 495, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Better
...ho only get the movie narrated to them. better still we can say those poeple that actu...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 31, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...ratings. The fact that the contents of this reviews are not reaching enough prospec...
^^^^
Line 2, column 87, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... not reaching enough prospective viewers might be that there is no enough access ...
^^
Line 2, column 565, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ctive viewers are not aware of the movie existence, they go for other intrilling ...
^^
Line 3, column 216, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ospective viewers lack the awareness, or prospective viewers are not interested i...
^^
Line 3, column 423, Rule ID: TOO_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'to need'?
Suggestion: to need
...ty but are cheaper. Prospective viewers too need to consider their pockets when seeing a...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, so, still, therefore, as to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 28.8173652695 101% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 55.5748502994 54% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 2.0 16.3942115768 12% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1523.0 2260.96107784 67% => OK
No of words: 300.0 441.139720559 68% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.07666666667 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16179145029 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75804076998 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 146.0 204.123752495 72% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.486666666667 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 482.4 705.55239521 68% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => 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: 30.0 22.8473053892 131% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 76.4852927039 57.8364921388 132% => OK
Chars per sentence: 152.3 119.503703932 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.0 23.324526521 129% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.7 5.70786347227 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 5.15768463074 58% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => 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: 0.358221005803 0.218282227539 164% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.166293189649 0.0743258471296 224% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.166272301738 0.0701772020484 237% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.252059502976 0.128457276422 196% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.146357885981 0.0628817314937 233% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 14.3799401198 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.03 48.3550499002 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.197005988 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.78 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.07 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 98.500998004 57% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 12.3882235529 141% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.1389221557 126% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 11.9071856287 151% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
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.