cqx83的作文帖，求批

yishanchengUID: 2894733

9月9日交
2009.9.11NA agree or disagree it is only worth watching movies that can teach us something about real life'

Nowadays, an increasing number of people are pleased to go to the cinema not only because (not only 和because 的位置可以换一换)watching movies become a good way of relaxing, but also sometimes, people can learn something about our life from movies. Therefore, a fair proportion of people believe that it is only worth watching movies that can teach us something about real life. Others, however, hold the opposite view. As far as I am concerned, I support the latter one. My reasons are as follows.

To begin with, I admit that the movies, which we can learn something about life, are good choice for us to watch. We can deny the fact that there are so many classical films in the history, which have profound philosophy of life, attracting millions of people to go to the cinema, and some of them even win the Oscar academy award. The film Forrest Gump is an excellent example. It told people some meaningful sentences about life which we can hear people say them, although the film has passed over 15 years. In light of this, some meaningful is really worth to watch.（excellent）

However, we can’t make a conclusion that it is only worth watching movies that can teach us something about real life. First, as we all know, most of people watch movies in order to relax themselves and get out of the reality for just a while. Consequently, there will be inevitable possibility that people will choose an interesting or exciting movie rather than a meaningful but boring one to watch. My friend Tom is an example to illustrate the point. He says that some movies are so boring that he won’t watch them though he may understand something about life from them. He just watches the movies which can make people excited, such as Transformer and the Harry Potter series. (这个例子还是好的，但还可以再具体些。)

Moreover, not all of movies are to （are to 可以删去） teach people something about real life. We can even say only a few of movies have a purpose like this, though they may include some profound philosophy. For instance, the film Avatar, which earns over 2 billion dollar around the world, is absolutely a splendid movie in history. Nevertheless, the part where attract people most is its technology of 3D, and some audiences think ( the) movie is worthwhile even it only has the technology. In light of this, movie can bring us much more than the knowledge of real life, and it also like a mirror which can reflect the improvement of science and technology in recent years. We can see a lot of things through the movie.(good )

Based on the above reasons and analysis, I’d like to say it is worth watching movies which can teach us life philosophy, but it’s not the only choice because movies have other functions. As long as people could get what they want from movie, the movie is worthwhile.

语言不错，例子挺好，但还有上升的空间，祝你成功！

cqx83UID: 2671579

9月11日交
2009.9.19 NA Government should more support art museum and music performance than recreational facilities, such as swimming pool or play ground.

As social society develops, an increasing number of people concern about the work of the governments, especially in field of culture and recreation. A proportion of people believe that government should more support art museum and music performance than recreational facilities, such as swimming pool or play ground. Others, however, hold the opposite view. As far as I am concerned, I support the latter one. My reasons are as follows.

To begin with, I admit that culture things, such as art museum and music performance are popular in a large group of people nowadays. We can’t deny the fact that more and more people visit art museum and music performance in recent years, and it can be regarded as a good way for people spend their spare time. People are pleased to pay some time and money on them for the reason that they think that it can make their life more colorful and meaningful, and even sometimes they may learn something about culture from it. In light of this, it is a good choice for government to support art museum and music performance.

However, we can’t make a conclusion that government should more support art museum and music performance than recreational facilities. First, recreation facilities can help people relax themselves, which is good for them to get rid of the pressure from everywhere. As we all know, most of people, especially those white collars, have great pressure of work, so they really need to relax themselves. Swimming or doing exercise is a good choice. In addition, they can also become much healthier. Therefore, recreation facilities benefit a lot for people in many ways.

Moreover, people spend more time on recreational facilities than those culture things. According a recent statistic on the Internet, over 70 percent of people visit art museum or watch musical performance less than twice a year, on the contrary, most of them often swim or do exercise every week. However，there are not enough recreational facilities for people to use. For instance, the people of our community can not find a place to swim unless ride bicycle about an hour. Thus, government should construct more recreational facilities rather than museums.

Based on the above reasons and analysis, I’d like to say that government should spend more money in constructing recreational facilities. But cultural things can’t be ignored because they are also significant for people.

cqx83UID: 2671579

2009.9 25NA do you agree or disagree: having jobs with low paying salary and being high secure is better than jobs with high salary but being easy to be lost.

Nowadays, the topic of how to choose a job has aroused widely discussion among people. A proportion of people believe that having jobs with low paying salary and being high secure is better than jobs with high salary but being easy to be lost. Others, however, hold the opposite view. From my perspective, I support the former one. My reasons are as follows.

To begin with, I admit that there are some minor advantages of having jobs with low paying salary but high security. The most obvious one is that people won’t worry about losing their jobs even though sometimes they don’t finish their work well. Therefore, although their salary is low to some extent, a great number of people satisfy the jobs for they can fulfill the basic requirement for stable economic life.

Nevertheless, we can’t make a conclusion that low-paid but secure job is the better choice. On the contrary, I believe there are more major advantages of having jobs with high salary but being easy to be lost. First, it can make people achieve a higher standard life. As we all know, as the modern society develops, an increasing number of people don’t satisfy the life only with tasty food and pretty clothing. They also want to have extra money to buy some luxury things or travel abroad once a year to fulfill their spiritual needs. If they get a job with low salary, how can they achieve their goals? In light of this, having high-paid jobs is necessary for most people.

Moreover, although the job with high salary is really easy to lose, it can be an opportunity to stimulus people to work hard and become more excellent. There is no denying that if people feel unsafe about their jobs, most of them will show a more positive attitude on their work subconsciously in order to hold their position. My uncle is good example to illustrate the point. He used to work in a computer company which set a high-level standard for its employees. Many of his colleagues didn’t meet it and are fired. But his spirit of hard-working and never give up make him promoted. Thus, to some extent, people can benefit a lot from the risk of losing job.

Based on the above reasons and analysis, I’d like to say that high-paid but low secure job which can bring people a better life and make people more excellent is a more advisable choice. But it’s not suitable for everyone. After all, everyone should choose based on their own needs and interests.

lizhengjiangUID: 2619543

你好，9.11作文已改。
哈哈，感觉我们现在作文水平相当，非常期待你给我多指点问题啦。


17# cqx83

haoannaUID: 2582245

Nowadays, the topic of how to choose a jobhas aroused widely discussion among people. A proportion of people believe thathaving jobs with low paying salary and being high secure is better than jobs with high salary but being easy to be lost. Others,however, hold the opposite view. From my perspective, I support the former one.My reasons are as follows.


To begin with, I admit that there are someminor advantages of having jobs with low paying salary but high security. Themost obvious one is that people won’t worry about losing their jobs even thoughsometimes they don’t finish their work well. Therefore, although their salary is (salaries are) low to some extent, agreat number of people satisfy (are satisfied with)the jobs for they(我觉得指代不清) can fulfill the basic requirement for stable economic life.


Nevertheless, we can’t make a conclusionthat a low-paid but secure job is the better choice. On the contrary, Ibelieve there are more major advantages of having jobs with high salary butbeing easy to be lost. First, it can make people achieve a higher standardlife. As we all know, as the modern society develops, an increasing number ofpeople don’t satisfy(are not satisfied with ) thelife only with tasty food and pretty clothing. They also want to have extramoney to buy some luxury things or travel abroad once a year to fulfill theirspiritual needs. If they get a job with low salary, how can they achieve theirgoals? In light of this, having high-paid jobs is necessary for most people.


Moreover, although the job with high salaryis really easy to lose, it can be an opportunity to stimulus名词 (stimulate) people to work hard and become more excellent（excellent无比较级）. There is no denying that if peoplefeel unsafe about their jobs, most of them will show a more positive attitudeon their work subconsciously in order to hold their position. My uncle is goodexample to illustrate the point. He used to work in a computer company whichset a high-level standard for its employees. Many of his colleagues didn’t meetit and are fired. But his spirit of hard-workingand never give up（and前后不对称） make him promoted. Thus, to some extent, people can benefit a lotfrom the risk of losing job.


Based on the above reasons and analysis, I’dlike to say that high-paid but a low securejob which can bring people a better life and make people more excellent is a more advisable choice. But it’snot suitable for everyone. After all, everyone should choose(差宾语) based on their ownneeds and interests.
除开一些小错误，逻辑很清楚，举例很好。
共勉。

canonleeUID: 2827997

很好的文章！
修改9月14日交_cqx83.doc (29 KB, 下载次数: 37)

2010-9-15 12:20:23 上传

下载次数: 37

cqx83UID: 2671579

9.16

抹茶芝士UID: 2733738

ding

卡姆菜菜子UID: 2852079

改好了。。求楼主回批~~~~
9月16日交.
2009. 10. 17 NA Do you agree or disagreewith the following statement? Movies and televisions should always showaudience good people are being rewarded and bad people are being punished.


Nowadays, the topic of what should be shownon the screen of movies and televisions have aroused widely discussion amongpeople. A group of people believe that movies and televisions should alwaysshow audience good people are being rewarded and bad people are being punished.Others, however, hold the opposite view. As far as I am concerned, I supportthe latter one. My reasons are as follows.


To begin with, I concede that sometimesmovies and televisions should show some kind of good issues, includingrewarding good people and punishing bad people. As we all know, movies andtelevisions, which are kind of media, have the responsibility to publicize apositive value to all group of people. If people see that good people are beingreward and bad people are being punished, they will definitely feel encouragedto do good things. Especially for children, who are easily influenced by thesociety, including movies and televisions, it is important to tell them what isright and what is wrong. In light of this, showing positive things is benefitfor the whole society.


Nevertheless, we can’t make a conclusionthat movies and television should always show these(these 感觉不好。有点指的不明确). First of all, in the real society, we can’t always witness thatgood people are being reward and bad people are being punished, so if moviesand television always show these situations, people can’t be convinced.According a recent survey on the Internet, about 50 percent of people are notrewarded after they help others. Therefore, as a tool help people get information（这句语法有点不太对吧。）, movies and televisions should tell the truth besides publicize thepositive attitude.


Moreover, movies and televisions are notalways reflecting the reality, so it’s not necessary to show those positivethings.（逻辑不明白，为什么不用反映现实就没必要展示给人们积极向上的东西？） For instance, some movie or soap opera need an unexpected ending toattract people to watch the whole part, as a result, the composer might plan tomake the bad people alive or good people died. Meanwhile, the audience justconcern about how the movie goes, not the question that whether the bad peopleshould be punished. We needn’t worry about it because almost every people havethe ability to distinguish between the reality and the screen.


Taking into account all the factorsdiscussed above, I’d like to say that movies and televisions shouldn’t alwaysshow audience good people are being rewarded and bad people are being punished.
写的很不错啊。感觉英语功底很好~~
但是模板气息有点重。不知道有没有影响啊。

enyadidoUID: 2891551

Nowadays, the topic of what should be shown on the screen of movies and televisions have aroused widely discussion among people. A group of people believe that movies and televisions should always show audience good people are being rewarded and bad people are being punished. Others, however, hold the opposite view. As far as I am concerned, I support the latter one. My reasons are as follows.

To begin with, I concede that sometimes movies and televisions should show some kind of good issues, including rewarding good people and punishing bad people. As we all know, movies and televisions, which are kind of media, have the responsibility to publicize a positive value to all group of people. If people see that good people are being reward and bad people are being punished, they will definitely feel encouraged to do good things. Especially for children, who are easily influenced by the society, including movies and televisions, it is important to tell them what is right and what is wrong. In light of this, showing positive things is benefit for the whole society.

Nevertheless, we can’t make a conclusion that movies and television should always show these. First of all, in the real society, we can’t always witness that good people are being reward and bad people are being punished, so if movies and televisions always show these, people (audiences) can’t be convinced. According a recent survey on the Internet, about 50 percent of people are not rewarded after they help others. Therefore, as a tool (+for) people get information, movies and televisions should tell the truth besides publicize the positive attitude.

Moreover, movies and televisions are not always reflecting the reality, so it’s not necessary to show those positive things. For instance, some movie or soap opera need an unexpected ending to attract people to watch the whole part, as a result, the composer might plan to make the bad people alive or good people died. Meanwhile, the audience just concern about how the movie goes, not the question that whether the bad people should be punished. We needn’t worry about it because almost every people have the ability to distinguish between the reality and the screen.

Taking into account all the factors discussed above, I’d like to say that movies and televisions shouldn’t always show audience good people are being rewarded and bad people are being punished.

写的很有逻辑，很有说服力
语法知识好扎实的说~基本都挑不出什么问题……向你学习~
我的作文地址https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1156476-1-1.html 麻烦改一下~

cqx83UID: 2671579

9.18

空空仔UID: 2792743

改9/18作业~见附件~