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 memo from the movie producer argues that for the movie to be a success, the funding needs to be increased by 10%. However, before reaching any sort of conclusion, there are many unstated assumptions that need to be answered.
First of all, the producer assumes that advertising business is notiriously wasteful in filming commercials. The memo overly generalizes, and attributes wasting time to every director in the advertising business. There is no statistical information provided or for that matter any evidence provided on how advertising business is wasteful. It might be the case that, experienced directors in the advertising industry know how to film without being prodigal.
Moreover, the producer attributes experience in commercials for a shampoo company with no experience at all in the movie industry by using the term "first-time director". A director be it in any industry has to have some inherent qualities like managing people, being imaginative and so on. These qualities or skills improve as time goes on. It might be the case that the "first-time director" has a good amount of experience and has gained the formerly stated skills. In that case, stating that the director will waste the time is fallacious. Instead, the director might use his intuitive skills to get a perfect shot within a few takes.
In addition, the argument states that, the extra money saved by hiring inexperienced producers and directors will undoubtedly cost them even more in the form of expenditure for actors and crew. It assumes that the inexperienced producers and directors will waste time by arranging things on the set. Information such as how much time the producers and directors may take to arrange things is not provided and the argument assumes that the overtime will be large enough to waste the money that they have saved. However, it might be the case that, the assistant directors and producers coordinate wello because of the directors' experience in shampoo commercials and come up with a perfect take in the first shot itself. There is no way to tell if the overtime is going to be big or not. If it is large enough, then the argument holds true. If not there is no need to raise more money.
In conclusion, further investigation is required into the formerly stated assumptions and a detailed analysis has to be made before coming to any sort of conclusion on raising the money.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: First of all, the producer assumes that advertising business is notiriously wasteful in filming commercials.
Error: notiriously Suggestion: notoriously
Sentence: However, it might be the case that, the assistant directors and producers coordinate wello because of the directors' experience in shampoo commercials and come up with a perfect take in the first shot itself.
Error: wello Suggestion: well
----------------
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- duplicated to argument 1
argument 3 -- not exactly
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 401 350
No. of Characters: 1954 1500
No. of Different Words: 177 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.475 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.873 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.788 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 134 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 111 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 89 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 50 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.05 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.813 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.55 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.304 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.537 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.097 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 34, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...al. Moreover, the producer attributes experience in commercials for a shampoo ...
^^
Line 5, column 251, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...stry has to have some inherent qualities like managing people, being imaginative ...
^^
Line 7, column 839, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...e enough, then the argument holds true. If not there is no need to raise more mone...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, moreover, so, then, well, as to, in addition, in conclusion, sort of, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2031.0 2260.96107784 90% => OK
No of words: 401.0 441.139720559 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.06483790524 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.47492842339 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98865294782 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.45885286783 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 655.2 705.55239521 93% => 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: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.483561681 57.8364921388 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.55 119.503703932 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.05 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.05 5.70786347227 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => 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: 0.209622749585 0.218282227539 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0695892064322 0.0743258471296 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0759546538394 0.0701772020484 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120739869844 0.128457276422 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0820932492689 0.0628817314937 131% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.86 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 98.500998004 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.