I would give this review a score of 40 out of 50 points. The reviewer did a good job of providing a clear and specific pronunciation of language, using pictures and visual aids to convey their points, and summarizing the review within 2-4 minutes.
The reviewer also effectively presented their claim in the introduction, supported it with evidence in the body, addressed counterclaims, provided a rebuttal, and gave a recommendation. However, they could have further elaborated on the reasons why the opposing opinions about the movie are not true.
Overall, I would consider seeing the movie based on this review. The reviewer's positive remarks and evidence supporting the movie's quality would likely sway me to give it a chance. Additionally, their recommendation at the end would also influence my decision.
_______ Clear, specific pronunciation of language (10 points)
_______ Use of pictures and other visual aids to convey body of review (5 points)
_______ Review summarized within 2-4 minutes (20 points)
--Claim, hook in introduction: sci-fi movie good/bad?
--Evidence supporting claim in body: facts, examples, observations, etc.
--Counterclaim: Respond to opposing opinions about movie
--Rebuttal: explain why they are not true
--Solution: Recommendation (don’t/see it), other call to action; rating
_______ Respond to audience’s questions (15 points)
_______ Total (out of 50 points)
Comments: Would you go see this movie after hearing this review?
Why or why not?
1 answer
1 answer