The following appeared in an ad for a book titled How to Write a Screenplay for a Movie.
“Writers who want to succeed should try to write film screenplays rather than books, since the average film tends to make greater profits than does even a best-selling book. It is true that some books are also made into films. However, our nation’s film producers are more likely to produce movies based on original screenplays than to produce films based on books, because in recent years the films that have sold the most tickets have usually been based on original screenplays.”
Discuss how well reasoned is this argument. The aspirant needs to understand that there are certain assumptions being made in the argument and that is where his cue lies. He needs to point out these assumptions and state whether or not it is correct to have such assumptions given the scenario in the film-industry nowadays. He need not include names of any movies; rather he should depend on logic and reasoning to support his answer.
The author of the book titled How to write a Screenplay for a Movie is advertising his book by suggesting that writers who want to succeed in their profession can only do so , if they try writing film screenplays rather than books. This claim of his is reasoned by stating more profits being made today by average films in comparison to the best selling books. However, the author's claim regarding the same is substantially unreasonable. He presents unconvincing premise along questionable assumptions which render his advertisement wholly unpersuasive.
To begin with, the author mentions that the success parameter can be achieved by all the writers only if they write film screenplays. So in a sense , the meaning conveyed by him is that the content of the matter one writes , does not decide the success parameter but if the person writes film screenplays it gives the sure shot definition of success. Additionally, he backs up this claim by citing the profit made by the average film in comparison to the best selling book, but has not provided any evidence regarding the same. Without proper evidence, one cannot just arrive to this conclusion.
Furthermore, the author tends to assume that all the writers publish books only to gain profits. Some people write books to communicate, pen down their ideas, imaginations for a wider purpose. If people like their idea, it is then restructured and conveyed in the form of movies or documentaries again.The money and fame gained via the entertainment route is just a secondary wheel in the whole process. Moreover, if one sees, then this author too has penned a book and not a screenplay.So if we go by the author's logic, he wont be a successful one.
Thirdly, the author has cited another point- to write original screenplays rather than just adapting those screenplays directly from books itself, as this trend is the most successful one among the nation's leading producers nowadays. Again, the author has failed to provide the evidence to back up this claim.The author needs to provide exact numbers to back up his claim. He also tends to overlook the fact that the producers will make movies of the script they find to be most promising.Even, the high rate sellout of the ticket is based on the fact that the audience liked the amalgamation of the movie components and not because it was based on an original screenplay.
In a nutshell, the advertising gimmick used by the writer of the books fails to provide any compelling reasons on why one should buy his book. If the writer could have been more specific about the audience he was targeting to and had provided hard evidence to back his claims made in the ad, it could have made the advertisement more appealing and convincing.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 174, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...cceed in their profession can only do so , if they try writing film screenplays ra...
^^
Line 3, column 148, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ey write film screenplays. So in a sense , the meaning conveyed by him is that the...
^^
Line 3, column 223, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...hat the content of the matter one writes , does not decide the success parameter b...
^^
Line 5, column 303, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...e form of movies or documentaries again.The money and fame gained via the entertain...
^^^
Line 5, column 488, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: So
... has penned a book and not a screenplay.So if we go by the authors logic, he wont ...
^^
Line 5, column 507, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...and not a screenplay.So if we go by the authors logic, he wont be a successful one. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 310, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...vide the evidence to back up this claim.The author needs to provide exact numbers t...
^^^
Line 8, column 490, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Even
...e script they find to be most promising.Even, the high rate sellout of the ticket is...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, if, look, moreover, regarding, second, so, then, third, thirdly, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 61.0 55.5748502994 110% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2285.0 2260.96107784 101% => OK
No of words: 465.0 441.139720559 105% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91397849462 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64369019777 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81668592363 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 204.123752495 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.50752688172 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 701.1 705.55239521 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.0382978008 57.8364921388 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.411764706 119.503703932 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.3529411765 23.324526521 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.52941176471 5.70786347227 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.273061372176 0.218282227539 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0853154162366 0.0743258471296 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.102810353859 0.0701772020484 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.154609911932 0.128457276422 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.101899391568 0.0628817314937 162% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 14.3799401198 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 48.3550499002 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 12.197005988 103% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.49 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 98.500998004 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.