fewer people attended super screen movies, in spite of existing a high quality, to overcome this problem is better to allocate a higher amount of budget on advertising to increase the awareness of persons about movies
This memo denotes that the declination of predilection of general public to purchase the super movies, even though subsuming a high quality can be ascribed to the lack of awareness of people about the current proper movies. To bolster this thesis, three postulations have been proposed. 1) Augmenting the advertisements to elevate the awareness of people. 2) Despite the presence of appropriate movie reviews, a number of sellings are low. 3) The quality of movies is not a determined factor since it has been proved. Close scrutiny each of facts divulges that none of them seem plausible.
A threshold problem with the argument involves the shortage of any blemish in quality of movies. Indeed, the quality of movies is inspected only by some reviewers who the experts and specialists are not explicitly specified in the text. Thus, the writer mentions the investigation the quality of movies, conversely, he does not determine the knowledge of reviewers to what degree. So, it is problematic. Additionally, the issue of implementing advanced technologies and cutting-edge discoveries in engendering the movies besides the quality of movies are not scrutinized in the text.
Even assuming that concentrating on advertisements to provoke the customers to purchase these movies do not sound tenable. To elucidate, now, a myriad of persons can easily access to numerous ads through the invasion of technologies, but among these assorted tools, people are not inclined toward adds to opt for their commodities. In fact, the more the faults and lies are in the ads, the less the probability of trust will thrive among the individuals to buy them. That means, the scrivener omits the significance of strengthen the relationship and authenticity among the consumers to compel them to purchase their movies.
Nor does the mere fact that the confirmation of movie reviewers is an emblem of proper movies to purchase. To delineate, the author cannot substantiate the issue of genres, story and familiarity of characters for the customers. Needless to say, hardly will people demonstrate any penchants to buy the movies not containing their desire movies. Therefore, to become prosperous in enchanting the attention of buyers, the movie maker should regard the role of orthodox content of movies for their allegiances in higher priority than perusing the movies by reviewers only.
In sum the argument is coherently blemished and therefore implausible as it stands. To justify the thesis, the author must insert the issue of desirable contents of their movies for their followers. As well as, the movie revision should be carried out by experts not ordinary or laypersons. Ultimately, the importance of concreting the bounding of interactions among the buyers and the movie makers beyond the advertisements should be considered profoundly.
(447 words)
Comments
suggestions:
suggestions:
Better not to use a language pattern in the essay which can be easily figured out by examiners.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 59, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...that the declination of predilection of general public to purchase the super movies, even thou...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 516, Rule ID: CLOSE_SCRUTINY[1]
Message: Use simply 'scrutiny'.
Suggestion: Scrutiny
...rmined factor since it has been proved. Close scrutiny each of facts divulges that none of the...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 246, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[10]
Message: The adverb 'hardly' is usually put between 'will' and 'people'.
Suggestion: will hardly people
...ers for the customers. Needless to say, hardly will people demonstrate any penchants to buy the mo...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, conversely, if, so, then, therefore, thus, well, in fact, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 77.0 55.5748502994 139% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2394.0 2260.96107784 106% => OK
No of words: 451.0 441.139720559 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.30820399113 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60833598836 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05574129783 2.78398813304 110% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 204.123752495 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.538802660754 0.468620217663 115% => OK
syllable_count: 749.7 705.55239521 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 55.5041133361 57.8364921388 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.086956522 119.503703932 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6086956522 23.324526521 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.5652173913 5.70786347227 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.184484716075 0.218282227539 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0450789171319 0.0743258471296 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0424753230592 0.0701772020484 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.098660659904 0.128457276422 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0475834536104 0.0628817314937 76% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 14.3799401198 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.3550499002 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.27 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 134.0 98.500998004 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 12.3882235529 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.