Please helppp, I ask this many times:( I'll mark you as the brainliest if can do this:((( write a short and simple critique on a film that you already watched before. Be guided with the questions provided below in writing your critique.

1. What is the film all about?
write a very short background about the film
2. how did the characters portray their roles?
3. What were the good points about the film?
4. what were the weak points you observe in the film?
5. what were the lessons you learned in the film? ​

Read the passage from sugar changed the world. sugar is a taste we all want, a taste we all crave. people throughout the planet everywhere have been willing to do anything, anything at all, to get that touch of sweetness. we even know exactly how thrilling it was to taste sugar for the first time. when the lewis and clark expedition met up with the shoshone, who had little previous contact with old world products, sacagawea gave a tiny piece of sugar to a chief. he loved it, saying it was "the best thing he had ever tasted." sugar created a hunger, a need, which swept from one corner of the world to another, bringing the most terrible misery and destruction, but then, too, the most inspiring ideas of liberty. sugar changed the world. we begin that story with a man who could never know enough. how does the conclusion of the prologue support the authors’ purpose? select two options. it introduces the topic that will be addressed next. it provides information about the authors. it states why the topic is relevant to readers. it cites sources the authors used in the text. it explains how the authors came to study the subject.

Read the excerpt from frederick douglass’s speech “what to the slave is the fourth of july? ”go where you may, search where you will, roam through all the monarchies and despotisms of the old world, travel through south america, search out every abuse, and when you have found the last, lay your facts by the side of the everyday practices of this nation, and you will say with me, that, for revolting barbarity and shameless hypocrisy, america reigns without a rival.what is one way that douglass achieves his purpose of persuading the reader to see his point of view? by relating as many facts and statistics to the reader as possibleby using familiar and casual language to make the reader feel comfortableby using gentle language to evoke a sense of calm and tranquilityby repeating the word “you” to directly relate to the reader

Read the passage. excerpt from "why equal pay is worth fighting for" by senator elizabeth warren, april 17, 2014 i honestly can't believe that we're still arguing over equal pay in 2014. when i started teaching elementary school after college, the public school district didn't hide the fact that it had two pay scales: one for men and one for women. women have made incredible strides since then. but 40 years later, we're still debating equal pay for equal work. women today still earn only 77 cents for every dollar a man earns, and they're taking a hit in nearly every occupation. bloomberg analyzed census data and found that median earnings for women were lower than those for men in 264 of 265 major occupation categories. in 99.6 percent of occupations, men get paid more than women. that's not an accident; that's discrimination. the effects of this discrimination are real, and they are long lasting. today, more young women go to college than men, but unequal pay makes it harder for them to pay back student loans. pay inequality also means a tougher retirement for women. . for middle-class families today, it usually takes two incomes to get by, and many families depend as much on mom's salary as they do on dad's, if not more. women are the main breadwinners, or joint breadwinners, in two-thirds of the families across the country, and pay discrimination makes it that much harder for these families to stay afloat. women are ready to fight back against pay discrimination, but it's not easy. today, a woman can get fired for asking the guy across the hall how much money he makes. here in the senate, sen. barbara mikulski (d-md.) introduced the paycheck fairness act to give women the tools to combat wage discrimination. it would ensure that salary differences have something to do with the actual job that they are doing, and not just because they are women. senator warren states that the effects of pay discrimination are long-lasting. is this a valid argument supported by accurate evidence? no; warren weakens her point by claiming that the paycheck fairness act would "give women the tools to combat wage discrimination." yes; warren supports her point by noting, "for middle-class families today, it usually takes two incomes to get by." yes; warren supports her point by noting, "pay inequality also means a tougher retirement for women." no; warren weakens her point by noting, "today, a woman can get fired for asking the guy across the hall how much money he makes."