Some people feel that the government should regulate the level of violence for films and cinema. Others feel that violent films should not be released. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

While it can be argued that the level of violence movies should be controlled by the laws, other people strongly advocate that these films should be entirely prohibited. This essay will investigate both views and I totally agree with the former viewpoint with some following reasons.

On the one hand, there are several reasons why the national leader should enact regulation in order to control the level of violence for media production. To begin with, it is patently obvious that films have direct influence on audiences. Therefore, people, especially children and teenagers who don’t have ability to distinguish between right or wrong would have a tendency to imitate what they saw in movies. This could lead to various inappropriate behaviors in society and potentially criminal afterwards. As a result, these regulations are regarded as feasible solutions for reducing negative impacts of violent media on the public and enhancing protection of community.

On the other hand, there are still people holding the belief that those films should not be released to the public. However, those action movies containing high-level entertaining factors attract a vast majority of audiences. Through those movies, viewers have opportunities to experience the sense of relaxation and satisfaction. Furthermore, the permanent ban on violent media financially affects the movie industry, which significantly contributes to the national economy.

In conclusion, although the prohibition can bring some advantages, I am of the opinion that these action movies should be regulated by the government to avoid economic decline.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"While it can be argued" -> "It can be argued"
Explanation: Removing "While" simplifies the introduction and aligns with the formal academic style, which typically avoids unnecessary conjunctions at the beginning of sentences.
"the level of violence movies" -> "the level of violence in movies"
Explanation: Adding "in" corrects the grammatical structure and clarifies the intended meaning, making the phrase more precise and grammatically correct.
"other people strongly advocate" -> "many advocate"
Explanation: Replacing "other people strongly advocate" with "many advocate" reduces redundancy and maintains a formal tone by avoiding unnecessary emphasis.
"I totally agree" -> "I strongly agree"
Explanation: "Totally" is informal and can be seen as overly emphatic in academic writing. "Strongly" is more appropriate and maintains a formal tone.
"with some following reasons" -> "for the following reasons"
Explanation: "With some following reasons" is awkward and unclear. "For the following reasons" is more direct and appropriate for academic writing.
"the national leader should enact regulation" -> "the government should enact regulations"
Explanation: "The national leader" is vague and imprecise; "the government" is more specific and appropriate in formal contexts. Also, "regulation" should be plural to match the context of multiple regulations.
"it is patently obvious" -> "it is evident"
Explanation: "Patently obvious" is somewhat informal and can be seen as redundant. "Evident" is a more formal and concise alternative.
"people, especially children and teenagers who don’t have ability to distinguish between right or wrong" -> "individuals, particularly children and teenagers who lack the ability to distinguish between right and wrong"
Explanation: "People" is too general; "individuals" is more precise. "Don’t have ability" is informal and incorrect; "lack the ability" is grammatically correct and formal. Also, "right or wrong" should be "right and wrong" for grammatical correctness.
"would have a tendency to imitate" -> "may imitate"
Explanation: "Would have a tendency to" is unnecessarily complex and verbose. "May imitate" is more direct and maintains a formal tone.
"potentially criminal afterwards" -> "potentially criminal behavior"
Explanation: "Potentially criminal afterwards" is awkward and unclear. "Potentially criminal behavior" is clearer and more appropriate in an academic context.
"those action movies" -> "these action movies"
Explanation: "Those" is less specific and less formal than "these," which is more appropriate for referring to previously mentioned items in academic writing.
"high-level entertaining factors" -> "highly entertaining elements"
Explanation: "High-level entertaining factors" is awkward and unclear. "Highly entertaining elements" is more precise and formal.
"have opportunities to experience the sense of relaxation and satisfaction" -> "experience a sense of relaxation and satisfaction"
Explanation: "Have opportunities to experience" is redundant; "experience" alone is sufficient and more direct.
"the permanent ban on violent media" -> "a permanent ban on violent media"
Explanation: "The" is incorrect as it implies a specific ban, whereas "a" is more appropriate for a general reference.
"financially affects the movie industry" -> "affects the financial viability of the movie industry"
Explanation: "Financially affects" is awkward and unclear. "Affects the financial viability of" is more precise and formal.

These changes enhance the precision, formality, and clarity of the essay, aligning it more closely with academic writing standards.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 5

Band Score for Task Response: 5 – UNDER WORD

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay addresses both views regarding the regulation of violent films, but it does so in a limited manner. The first viewpoint is presented with some detail, discussing the potential negative influence of violent films on audiences, particularly children. However, the second viewpoint is not explored as thoroughly. The mention of the entertainment value of violent films and their economic impact is brief and lacks depth. The essay does not fully engage with the implications of banning violent films, which is a key aspect of the prompt.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer should provide a more balanced discussion of both viewpoints. This could involve elaborating on the arguments against regulation, such as the importance of artistic freedom or the role of parental guidance. Additionally, including examples or statistics could strengthen the arguments presented.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay states a clear position in favor of regulating violent films, as indicated by phrases like "I totally agree with the former viewpoint." However, this position is not consistently reinforced throughout the essay. The conclusion reiterates the preference for regulation but does not clearly articulate the reasons behind this stance in relation to the arguments presented.
- How to improve: To maintain a clear and consistent position, the writer should ensure that each paragraph ties back to their viewpoint. This can be achieved by explicitly linking the arguments made in favor of regulation to the conclusion, reinforcing why regulation is preferable over a total ban.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents some ideas, particularly in the first paragraph regarding the negative effects of violent films. However, the support for these ideas is somewhat weak. For example, while it mentions that children may imitate violent behavior, it does not provide specific examples or research to substantiate this claim. The second viewpoint is presented but lacks sufficient development and supporting details.
- How to improve: To improve the presentation and support of ideas, the writer should aim to elaborate on each point made. This could involve providing specific examples, anecdotes, or data that illustrate the arguments. Additionally, using transitional phrases can help in extending ideas logically and cohesively.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, discussing the regulation of violent films. However, there are moments where the focus shifts slightly, particularly in the second viewpoint where the discussion of economic impact feels somewhat tangential to the core argument about violence in films.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should ensure that every point made directly relates to the central question of whether violent films should be regulated or banned. Avoiding unrelated points and ensuring that each argument ties back to the main topic will help in maintaining relevance.

Overall, to improve the essay’s band score, the writer should aim for a more balanced exploration of both viewpoints, provide more substantial support for their ideas, and ensure that their position is consistently articulated throughout the essay. Additionally, addressing the word count issue is crucial, as being under the required word limit can significantly impact the overall score.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear structure, with an introduction, two body paragraphs discussing opposing views, and a conclusion. The argument progresses logically from the introduction to the conclusion. However, the transition between the two body paragraphs could be smoother. For instance, the shift from discussing the need for regulation to the benefits of violent films feels somewhat abrupt, lacking a clear linking sentence that ties the two ideas together.
- How to improve: To enhance logical flow, consider using transitional phrases that explicitly connect the ideas between paragraphs. For example, after discussing the need for regulation, you could introduce the opposing view with a phrase like, "Conversely, there are compelling arguments against such regulations." This would help guide the reader through your reasoning more effectively.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, which is crucial for clarity. Each paragraph focuses on a distinct viewpoint, making it easy for the reader to follow the argument. However, the second body paragraph could benefit from clearer topic sentences that summarize the main idea of the paragraph.
- How to improve: Start each paragraph with a strong topic sentence that encapsulates the main idea. For example, the second body paragraph could begin with, "Opponents of regulation argue that violent films play a significant role in entertainment and the economy." This would provide a clearer framework for the reader and enhance the overall coherence of the essay.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "On the one hand" and "On the other hand," which effectively signal contrasting viewpoints. However, the use of cohesive devices is somewhat limited, and there are instances where the connections between sentences could be strengthened. For example, the phrase "As a result" is used, but there are few other devices that could enhance the connections between ideas.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a wider range of linking words and phrases. For instance, you could use "Furthermore," "In addition," or "Moreover" to add information, and "However," "Conversely," or "Nevertheless" to introduce counterarguments. This variety will not only improve the flow of the essay but also demonstrate a higher level of language proficiency.

By addressing these areas, the essay can achieve a higher level of coherence and cohesion, potentially improving the overall band score.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 6

Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a fair range of vocabulary, with terms like "regulation," "influence," "prohibited," and "entertaining factors." However, the vocabulary is somewhat repetitive, particularly in phrases like "level of violence" and "violent media," which are used multiple times without variation. This limits the overall lexical richness of the essay.
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, consider using synonyms or related terms. For example, instead of repeating "level of violence," you might use "degree of aggression" or "extent of brutality." Additionally, incorporating more varied adjectives and adverbs could enrich the descriptions and arguments presented.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains instances of imprecise vocabulary usage, such as "national leader" instead of "government" and "high-level entertaining factors," which could be more clearly articulated as "highly entertaining elements." Such imprecision can lead to confusion and detracts from the clarity of the arguments.
- How to improve: Focus on using vocabulary that accurately conveys the intended meaning. For example, replace "national leader" with "government" for clarity. Additionally, consider rephrasing "high-level entertaining factors" to "highly engaging content" to enhance precision. Regularly reviewing vocabulary in context can help in selecting the most appropriate words.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally exhibits good spelling, with only minor errors. However, there are a few instances where spelling could be improved, such as "don’t have ability" which should be "don’t have the ability." Such errors, while not frequent, can affect the overall impression of the writing.
- How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, practice proofreading your work before submission. Reading the essay aloud can help catch errors that might be overlooked when reading silently. Additionally, consider using spell-check tools or apps that highlight misspellings and suggest corrections.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a competent use of vocabulary, there is room for improvement in terms of range, precision, and spelling accuracy. By expanding vocabulary, ensuring precise word choice, and enhancing proofreading practices, the overall quality of lexical resource can be significantly improved.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 7

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good variety of sentence structures, including simple, compound, and complex sentences. For instance, the opening sentence effectively combines clauses to present contrasting views: "While it can be argued that the level of violence movies should be controlled by the laws, other people strongly advocate that these films should be entirely prohibited." However, the essay could benefit from more varied sentence beginnings and structures to enhance fluency and coherence. For example, the phrase "To begin with" is a common introductory phrase that could be replaced with alternatives like "Firstly" or "Initially" to avoid repetition.
- How to improve: To diversify sentence structures, consider incorporating more complex sentences that include subordinate clauses or varied conjunctions. Additionally, using participial phrases or introductory adverbial clauses can add sophistication. For example, instead of starting multiple sentences with "there are," try rephrasing to include active subjects or different constructions.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally maintains grammatical accuracy, but there are some areas for improvement. For instance, the phrase "the level of violence for media production" could be more clearly stated as "the level of violence in media production." Additionally, the sentence "people, especially children and teenagers who don’t have ability to distinguish between right or wrong" lacks an article before "ability," making it grammatically incorrect. Punctuation is mostly accurate, but the use of commas could be improved for clarity, especially in longer sentences.
- How to improve: Focus on ensuring articles are used correctly and consistently. Review the rules regarding noun phrases to avoid omissions. For punctuation, practice breaking down complex sentences into clearer segments, using commas to separate clauses effectively. Reading the essay aloud can help identify areas where pauses or breaks are needed for better clarity.

By addressing these areas, the essay could achieve a higher band score in Grammatical Range and Accuracy.

Bài sửa mẫu

While it can be argued that the level of violence in movies should be controlled by laws, others strongly advocate that these films should be entirely prohibited. This essay will investigate both views, and I strongly agree with the former viewpoint for the following reasons.

On the one hand, there are several reasons why the government should enact regulations to control the level of violence in media production. To begin with, it is evident that films have a direct influence on audiences. Therefore, individuals, particularly children and teenagers who lack the ability to distinguish between right and wrong, may imitate what they see in movies. This could lead to various inappropriate behaviors in society and potentially criminal behavior afterwards. As a result, these regulations are regarded as feasible solutions for reducing the negative impacts of violent media on the public and enhancing the protection of the community.

On the other hand, there are still people who believe that these films should not be released to the public. However, action movies containing highly entertaining elements attract a vast majority of audiences. Through these films, viewers have opportunities to experience a sense of relaxation and satisfaction. Furthermore, a permanent ban on violent media would affect the financial viability of the movie industry, which significantly contributes to the national economy.

In conclusion, although the prohibition of violent films can bring some advantages, I am of the opinion that these action movies should be regulated by the government to avoid economic decline.