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.
The memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie production Company concludes that, the content of the reviews from the past year are not reaching enough of the audience. They concluded this based on the report presented from the marketing department; positive reviews for the Super Screen Movies in the past year increased whereas fewer people attended the movies as compared to the past years. Butr before reaching the conclusion presented by the marketing director, three questions need to be answered as below.
Firslty, whether the number of positive reviews by the movie reviewers surpass the number of negative reviews of the Super Screen Movie. This data needs to be analysed in order to compare the actual reaction of the movie reviewers towards the movies released in the past year. For instance, if the movies this year had five thousand positive reviews on all the the review platforms, from the movie revieweres, whereas, the number of negative reviews were repleat; around seventy thousand very acerbic comments and reviews from around eighty percent of the movie reviewers. If this is the case, then the positive reviews will have negative effect on the audience's choice to opt for watching the movie. Hence, investing in advertising may have little to no effect in amilliorating the situation.
Further, a survey needs to be conducted on whether the cast of the movies produced this year is popular among the audience. As, it is possible that all the previous years had movies that were relatively lower in quality but the actors in the movies were immensly popular among the audience, snatching away the expected audience of the Super Screen Movies. Therefore, attracting huge crowds to the movies. In such a scenario, if the survey results for year's movies do not come in favor of the actors casted in the movies this year then that can be the actual reason behind the reduced viewrship for the Super Screen Movies and any extra investment on advertising can lead a setback to the production budget.
Furthermore, one of the most important question, that is, which all movies were released as competitors to the Super Screen Movies this year needs to be answered. This question will bring one of the most important insights to the table. For instance, if there were highly anticipated and popular movies scheduled to be released in the same weeks as Super Star Movies, then the whole issue will be a result of incorrect movie release schedules, though the movies were better in quality as compared to previous years ( leading to the increased number of positive reviews from the movie reviewers but unable to pull crowds). In such as scenario, other measure will need to be taken in order to improve the performance of the movies in future and increasing advertising budget may have no impact.
In conclusion, the argument as it stands now, is flawed and based on several unstated assumptions (not necessarily correct), a survey needs to be conducted and data ( preferably in the format of systematic study needs to be presented in order to analyse the argument and reach to a conclusion. Otherwise, the decision made on the basis of the argument presented can lead to the negative impact on the Super Screen Movie Production budget.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 11 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 545 350
No. of Characters: 2669 1500
No. of Different Words: 212 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.832 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.897 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.506 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 211 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 143 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 104 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 55 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 30.278 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 14.869 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.611 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.393 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.601 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.152 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 358, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...d five thousand positive reviews on all the the review platforms, from the movie review...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 358, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...d five thousand positive reviews on all the the review platforms, from the movie review...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 515, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...in quality as compared to previous years leading to the increased number of posit...
^^
Line 9, column 163, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... a survey needs to be conducted and data preferably in the format of systematic s...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, hence, if, may, so, then, therefore, whereas, for instance, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 28.8173652695 56% => OK
Preposition: 87.0 55.5748502994 157% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2730.0 2260.96107784 121% => OK
No of words: 545.0 441.139720559 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00917431193 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83169070408 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58247087011 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 222.0 204.123752495 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.407339449541 0.468620217663 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 849.6 705.55239521 120% => 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: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 30.0 22.8473053892 131% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 87.3050031799 57.8364921388 151% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.666666667 119.503703932 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.2777777778 23.324526521 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.55555555556 5.70786347227 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => 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: 0.438687275816 0.218282227539 201% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.161130425962 0.0743258471296 217% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.127114355814 0.0701772020484 181% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.270734147337 0.128457276422 211% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.104053555111 0.0628817314937 165% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.3 14.3799401198 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.03 48.3550499002 85% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.197005988 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.37 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.54 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 98.500998004 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.1389221557 126% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.