syntax help

[Anonymous No.13825003]

Is this worded good? Idk if the syntax is good too. Whats your thoughts/how can it be worded better?

[Anonymous No.13825015]

>>13825003
>I have some additional thoughts of how this film was made. Namely, the neighborhood shots and the culture - how most parents responded to their kids’ future (mostly negative).
Fixed, that’ll be $50

[Anonymous No.13825045]

>>13825015
btc?

[Anonymous No.13825052]

>>13825003
I have some additional remarks about how this film was made, specifically concerning its depictions of neighborhood and culture, which, like the manner with which most parents regard the future of their children, were mainly negative.

[Anonymous No.13825062]

>>13825003
>An additional remark could be made by drawing a parallel between the director's framing of the neighborhood shots - together with the culture portrayed therein - and the responses given by a majority of the parents when asked to appraise their child's future prospects: both are contextually interrelated in a causal loop; the negativity of one influencing the negativity of the other.

[Anonymous No.13825076]

>>13825003
>Is this worded good?

[Anonymous No.13825096]

>>13825003
Passive and overwrought. Em dash, really? Use commas and colons like a decent human being.

[Anonymous No.13825115]

>>13825096
Ive always used Em dashes. i was trying to breakaway from constantly using colons and commas lol.
>>13825062
Its great, but I don't think a highly detailed sentence like that will follow through with my moderate level of an essay.

[Anonymous No.13825167]

>>13825003
>Let it now at this juncture be communicated the following few remarks which are additional to those aforementioned, these being of importance with respect to the peculiar manner or design by which the film has been so perspicaciously realized. I mean those visual orthographies specifically which, of all those of which the cinematic work is composed, broadcast to the viewer the particularities of neighborhood and of milieu. To one's mind who regards with care these transmissions, nothing can be more certain than that they of especial force bring to the surface of conscious consideration those reminiscences of parental guardianship as it surveys the fates under which the children under its maintenance must succumb and perish. Such thoughts bring not with them anything more than torment and melancholy, and to such tempers the aforementioned scenes of footage under this present analysis likewise gives suggestion.

[Anonymous No.13825185]

>>13825003
>Is this worded good?

[Anonymous No.13825374]

>>13825003
>Is this worded good?

[Anonymous No.13825387]

>>13825374
>Is this worded good?

[Anonymous No.13825390]

>>13825387
>Is this worded good?
>>13825115

[Anonymous No.13825495]

>>13825003
>is this worded good

[Anonymous No.13825961]

Sucks, man.

Don't write about how you want to make additional remarks about a topic-- just write the fucking remarks.

You're bloviating.

[Anonymous No.13826078]

To me it reads like you're trying to write a paper "in the style of someone writing a paper," if that makes any sense. It's a really common problem and it's something you have to slowly work your way out of, as you find your own voice. That's part of college. But in your case, the innate awkwardness of that style is combining with sloppy/awkward grammar on your part, and the result is messy and unprofessional sounding.

If you try writing more naturally and simply, even if this feels awkward and artificial at first, your style might improve by at least becoming straightforwardly readable. I know it's tempting to use a bunch of em dashes and semicolons to link your thoughts together, since I have this shit tendency too. But take a step back from the text and try reading it like a novel with simple realist prose. It's like what you wrote is actively resisting giving up whatever simple bits of information it contains, packing maximum syntactic complexity into two fucking simple statements. When in doubt, default to simple declarative and shorter sentences in general. At least then the person grading your paper will just be bored by your ho-hum prose, which is better than them being annoyed.

The "some additional remarks" sentence is a fragment. It's rare to see this sort of construction:
>Some additional remarks about the author's politics.
>Some concluding thoughts.
>etc.
because it is technically a sentence fragment. It reads very "conversational," informal. I have seen respectable authors do this in articles and so on, but it only works when their style is slick and easygoing enough to justify it. Finding the right transitional phrasing is often difficult and context sensitive.

Either way, the "is how it was made" is the really ugly-sounding thing. It reads like a non-native speaker of English. You do the same thing in the second sentence with "how the culture was." I can't really find a way to describe why this instinctively feels ugly, other than saying it's an "irresponsible use of the copula." Maybe try to simplify and then replace awkward "is/was" clauses by using a nominal phrase whenever you can. For example:
>Some additional remarks about the film's production.
is far less ugly (though it would still be a fragment in this case).

The second sentence is the real mess though. Drop all that "namely" shit. Like I said, transitional phrasing is hard and I'm guilty of doing this too, so I'm critiquing myself here as well. Rephrase that whole thing to simple declarative prose. Aside from the pretentious-sounding semicolon use, the worst offender is the copula abuse again. It's just ugly and borderline non-idiomatic to say "Namely, how the culture was."

Logically, I don't even understand what "how the culture was" means. Worse, I don't understand how the depiction of culture is part of a film's production. "How it's made" seems like it would be reserved for technical and methodological aspects of the film.