A movie producer sent the following memo to the head of the movie studio.
“We need to increase the funding for the movie Working Title by 10% in order to ensure a quality product. As you know, we are working with a first-time director, whose only previous experience has been shooting commercials for a shampoo company. Since the advertising business is notoriously wasteful, it stands to reason that our director will expect to be able to shoot take after take, without concern for how much time is being spent on any one scene. In addition, while we have saved money by hiring relatively inexperienced assistant producers and directors, this savings in salary will undoubtedly translate to greater expenditures in paying the actors and unionized crew overtime for the extra hours they will spend on the set waiting for the assistant directors and producers to arrange things. If we don’t get this extra money, the movie is virtually assured to be a failure.”
The conclusion from the memo which was sent to the head of a movie studio explains the need for an increment in the budget allocated for the movie product, the increased amount is being stated to be gotten from extra money saved from inexperienced assistant directors. Well, this conclusion is based on the evidence that the director is not as skillful in movie production and there is a possibility that he/she will waste more time on the scene. So, if the cost of delay can be covered, the movie will be of good quality and successful. However, the recommendation seems flawed for some unstated assumptions which need to be warranted for the conclusion to be valid.
An unstated assumption is that more time spent on producing the movie can be translated to success. This means that no other area of movie production needs financial attention. Since the director is not well experienced in movie production and experienced in shooting commercials, if he does not understand the basis of movie production, even if he spends 20 days as opposed to 10 normal days, he will be unable to make a good movie. If the assumption is unwarranted, this means that the movie studio will spend money paying the crew for extra time and still fall back on a bad movie. The movie studio should rather focus on working with the best director.
In addition to the first unstated assumption, the 10% increase in the budget seems sufficient. Well, the percentage increase is relative to the actual amount. For example, a 10% increase on $1000 is $1100, the $100 might not seem to be a major contributing factor to producing a "quality" movie that will turn out very successful. When other factors of movie production that need financial attention is also assessed, there is a possibility that the movie studio might actually need more percentage increase their Until a piece ofevidence of a significant amount is shown, granting the request might be futile because more money will be needed.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for few identified reasons, more clarity and evidence are needed to further ascertain the efficiency of the conclusion. The movie studio needs to release a quality movie in the market, therefore, vital decisions need to be made which should be based on practical facts.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 1 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 388 350
No. of Characters: 1849 1500
No. of Different Words: 175 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.438 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.765 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.674 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 115 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 88 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 71 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 50 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.867 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.669 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.733 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.369 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.555 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.098 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 272, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
... major contributing factor to producing a 'quality' movie that will tur...
^
Line 5, column 518, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ally need more percentage increase their Until a piece ofevidence of a significan...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, however, if, so, still, therefore, well, for example, in addition, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1907.0 2260.96107784 84% => OK
No of words: 387.0 441.139720559 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.92764857881 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43534841618 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85292616139 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 204.123752495 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.467700258398 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 589.5 705.55239521 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => 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: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 74.1630635829 57.8364921388 128% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.133333333 119.503703932 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.8 23.324526521 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.2 5.70786347227 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => 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: 0.32258851412 0.218282227539 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.125030205449 0.0743258471296 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0606699171334 0.0701772020484 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.210462245378 0.128457276422 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0436099184712 0.0628817314937 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.3550499002 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.61 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 98.500998004 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.