Debate competition, should a successful work make a sequel? We are the affirmative side, so we should make a sequel. Ask questions from the opposing side, the more the better.
Alright, I can provide you with some counter-questions. 1. If the sequels change the original core elements of a successful work, such as the plot, characters, or worldview, should these changes be accepted? If you have to accept changes, will these changes destroy the unique charm and value of a successful work? Does making two sequels mean disrespect to the previous work? If so, would this disrespect lead to misunderstanding and destruction of the previous work? Would a 3-star sequela lead to the commodification of the work and maximize the benefits? If so, would the real value of the work be weakened due to this kind of commerce and profit? Would four sequels lead to a time limit and limited creative space? If so, would this restriction lead to a decline in the quality of the work? Will the sequels cause the fan base of the work to split and lose? If so, would this division and loss lead to the true value of the work being weakened? I hope these questions will help you better understand the opposing side's point of view. Now, we can start a free debate. Please raise your views and questions.
Should a classic (a successful work) be made into a sequel? affirmative debate
The issue of making a sequel to a classic (a successful work) was a topic worth discussing. I think it's acceptable to make a sequel to a classic because it can give the audience a better experience. Sequels to classic works could give the audience a chance to see the ending of the story and enjoy the complete storyline. If a film only had one ending, the audience might be disappointed because they couldn't know the future of the story. However, if there was a sequel to this work, the audience could continue to appreciate the story and enjoy the subsequent development. Sequels to classic works could also attract more audiences because sequels could bring new elements and plots to make the story more colorful. Some sequels to classic works were even more successful in attracting more viewers than the first. Sequels to classic works could also maintain their status as classics. If a work only had one ending, it might be forgotten as time passed. However, if there was a sequel to this work, it could maintain its iconic status and continue to attract the interest of the audience. To sum up, I think it's acceptable for a classic (successful work) to make a sequel. Not only could it bring a better experience to the audience, but it could also attract more viewers and maintain the iconic status of the work.
Should the successful work of the debate competition be made into a sequel?
Whether or not they should make a sequel depended on the work itself and the audience's preferences and needs. Some works were generally considered successful because of their attractive storyline, successful character creation, or unique artistic charm. Therefore, sequels might be made. For example, the Harry Potter series, the Lord of the Rings series, and the Twilight series. Some works might not be considered sequels because the storyline was dull, the characters were not well portrayed, or the artistic quality was not high enough. For example,'Dream of the Red Chamber',' Water Margins 'and' Journey to the West'. Whether or not they should make a sequel should be decided based on the situation of the work itself and the audience's reaction. If the audience liked the work very much and the sequels could better meet their needs, they might make sequels. However, if the audience's response was not good or the sequels could not achieve the expected effect, then the sequels might not be made.
Should the successful work of the debate competition be made into a sequel?
Whether or not they should make a sequel depended on the nature of the work itself and the audience's reaction. For some works such as movies, TV series, novels, etc., the audience might hope for a sequel to continue the story because they already had a good beginning and had high expectations for the subsequent plot. Under such circumstances, it might be a good choice to make a sequel to bring more surprises and satisfaction to the audience. However, there were also some works such as movies, TV series, novels, etc. The audience might not be willing to see the follow-up storyline because the storyline was already complete enough or inevitable changes had already taken place. Under such circumstances, making a sequel would waste resources, destroy the integrity of the story, and could lead to a loss of audience. Whether or not they should make a sequel should be decided based on the situation of the work itself and the audience's reaction. If the audience is full of expectations for the follow-up plot, then making a sequel may be a good choice. If the audience is not willing to see the follow-up plot, then making a sequel may waste resources, destroy the integrity of the story, and may lead to loss of audience.
The theme of the debate competition was " A successful work should be filmed as a sequel."
A successful work should be made into a sequela. The positive side can debate from the following aspects: 1. Sequels can increase the satisfaction and audience of a work: In a successful work, the audience can often get enough emotions and story clues from the first episode, hoping that the sequels will continue to push the story forward. By making sequels, the audience could better understand and experience the work, increasing their satisfaction and audience. Sequels could expand the influence and popularity of a work. The first part of a successful work could often attract enough audiences and establish a certain reputation and influence. Sequels could further expand the influence and popularity of the work, attract more audiences and media attention, and make the work more popular as a classic. 3. Sequels could create more business opportunities and profits: The first film of a successful work could often create enough business opportunities and profits to provide the foundation for subsequent filming. Making sequels could create more business opportunities and profits, expand the industry chain of the work, and make the work more successful. Sequels can improve the cohesiveness and integrity of the work: the first part of a successful work often has laid the foundation for the subsequent plot and development. Sequels can better maintain the cohesiveness and integrity of the work, allowing the audience to better understand and experience the story. To sum up, sequels played an important role in the follow-up development of a successful work. It could increase the satisfaction and audience of the work, expand the influence and popularity of the work, create more business opportunities and profits, and maintain the continuity and integrity of the work. Therefore, we should actively support the production of sequels to provide more possibilities for the successful development of the work.
Should the successful work of the 1999 International College Debate Competition be filmed as a sequel?
It shouldn't be. Although the 1999 International College Debate Competition's finale might be popular with readers, it might not necessarily be a suitable work for a sequel. First of all, each work had its own unique characteristics and style. If a sequel was made, it might repeat or strengthen the characteristics of the previous one instead of creating a new story. Secondly, the classic works might be outdated or criticized for damaging the image and value of the previous works. Therefore, even though " 1999 International College Debate Final Success " might be a successful work, it might not be a good choice to make a sequel.
Our school has a successful debate competition. Should we make a sequel? I'm the opposing side. Please give me more free debate arguments. Don't copy what's already on the internet...
Whether or not a successful work should be made into a sequel is a matter of copyright. You can refer to the following free debate arguments: Should the sequels of successful works be protected by copyright? A: Usually, the copyright of a successful work should be protected because it means that the creator has the right to make commercial use of the content, including adapting it into a sequel or any other form of work. Therefore, sequels should be regarded as independent works with the same copyright as the original works. Should I have the right to shoot a sequel? A: Whether or not the rights should allow the filming of a sequel depends on whether or not the creator has agreed to sell the rights to a third party. If the creator has sold the copyright to a company or individual, the company or individual has the right to decide whether to shoot a sequel and how to shoot it. If the creator did not sell the copyright, the company or individual must obtain the creator's permission to shoot the sequels. Should the sequels of successful works be protected by copyright? A: Whether or not a successful work's sequels should be protected depends on whether or not the creator has agreed to sell the copyright to a third party. If the creator has sold the copyright to a company or individual, the company or individual has the right to decide whether to shoot a sequel and how to shoot it. In this case, copyright protection helps to ensure that the copyright of a successful work is protected and will not be forgotten or exploited by an unauthorized third party. Should sequels of successful works be censored? A: Whether a successful work's sequels should be censored depends on copyright law. According to some copyright laws, if the copyright has been sold to a company or individual, the company or individual has the right to decide whether to censor the content and how to censor it. However, other copyright laws may require companies or individuals to review content to ensure that it meets ethical, legal, or other standards. Should sequels of successful works be censored to protect the rights of readers? A: Whether or not sequels of successful works should be censored to protect the rights of readers depends on the provisions of copyright law. Some copyright laws may require companies or individuals to review content to ensure that it meets ethical, legal, or other standards. However, other copyright laws might not have such a requirement. In this case, whether a successful work should be reviewed depended on whether the company or individual was willing to take such responsibility.
Debate Competition: "A good movie should be made into a sequel"
It was a very controversial topic in the production of movies whether or not sequels should be made. Some people think that a good movie should be made into a sequel because it allows the audience to enjoy the complete story of the movie and explore the plot more deeply. In addition, making sequels could also bring more business opportunities and profits to the film production company. However, there were also some people who believed that making sequels would not necessarily lead to good film production because sequels might repeat the mistakes and shortcomings of the previous films or lack the unique charm of the previous films. In addition, too many sequels could lead to fierce competition in the film market and reduce the quality and appeal of the film. Whether or not a movie should be made depended on the personal preferences and needs of each film production company and audience. If a good film could attract the interest of the audience and bring commercial success, then making a sequel might be a good choice. However, if the sequels couldn't surpass the quality and charm of the previous one, then too many sequels might reduce the overall quality of the movie.
In our debate competition, we were in the affirmative, and the topic was,"There must be a return for the effort." The opposing side's topic was,"There must be a return for the effort." How to distinguish the positive side
The affirmative side could debate around the following points: Contribution and return are closely related: there is a close relationship between contribution and return. Only by giving first can you expect to get a return. Whether it was in work, study, or personal life, we all need to put in effort and sweat before we can reap results and rewards. Therefore, in the debate, it can be emphasized that effort and reward are related. Only by putting in enough effort can you get the corresponding reward. The returns are usually visible: the returns between effort and return are usually visible. When we put in effort, we usually see the corresponding results and gains. For example, when we put in enough effort in work or study, we usually get rewards such as improvement and harvest. Therefore, it can be emphasized in the debate that the reward is usually visible, and only by putting in enough effort can you see the corresponding reward. 3. Contribution and return are proportional: Contribution and return are proportional. Our efforts and returns are usually proportional. Only by putting in enough effort can we get the corresponding returns. For example, when we put in enough effort at work, we usually get a higher position, better salary, and other rewards. Therefore, in the debate, it can be emphasized that effort and return are proportional. Only by putting in enough effort can you get the corresponding return. Success requires constant effort: the relationship between effort and return is constantly accumulating and sublimating. Only by constantly putting in effort could one continuously reap rewards. Success is not something that can be achieved overnight. It requires constant perseverance and hard work. Therefore, it can be emphasized in the debate that success requires constant effort. Only by putting in enough effort can you achieve continuous success. The above are some points that the positive side can revolve around. They can be freely developed and supplemented according to the specific situation and topic of the debate.
Now, we are going to have a debate competition. The negative side's debate topic is more important for the creative ability of the work of art. The positive side's inspiration for the creation of the work of art is more important. We are the negative side.
The ability to create works of art is more important. The positive side is the inspiration for the creation of works of art is more important. We are the negative side. We can refer to the following arguments that the negative side debater might make: 1. Creation inspiration can be crammed up at the last minute, but creation ability is the result of long-term accumulation. If you only have creative inspiration but no creative ability, then the work may lack depth and content. It's just simple plagiarism or imitation. If one only had the ability to create without inspiration, they might fall into the quagmire of plagiarism or imitation. Therefore, creative ability was more important than inspiration. 2. The ability to create can be cultivated, but inspiration can come from accumulation. If we can continue to learn, think and practice, we can cultivate our own creative ability. However, if one only had creative inspiration and no creative ability, they might lack creativity and competitiveness, making it difficult for them to stand out in the art market. Therefore, creative ability was more important than inspiration. 3. The creative ability can be measured, but the creative inspiration cannot. We can evaluate the creative ability of a work of art in various ways, such as evaluating its technique, content, style, and so on. And if we only have inspiration, we can't measure the value of a work by the same standard. Therefore, creative ability was more important than inspiration. 4. The ability to create can affect the value of a work of art, while inspiration can determine the direction and style of the work. An artist with creative ability might show different styles and characteristics in different works. However, if one only had creative inspiration, they might fall into a single creative style and it would be difficult to produce unique artistic value. Therefore, creative ability was more important than inspiration. These arguments can be used as the opposing debater's point of view in the debate, but it should be noted that the debate is not only a simple statement of the point of view, but also through logic, evidence and examples to support their point of view in order to win the game.
The classic argument of the opposing side in the online pros and cons debate competition
Network pros and cons As a modern communication tool, the Internet provided a convenient and fast way for people to communicate. The benefits of the internet included: 1. The Internet allows us to obtain information more easily. Through the network, we can access all kinds of information resources, including news, articles, videos, etc., anytime and anywhere. Moreover, these contents can be shared on various platforms, making the information more diverse and rich. The Internet can also help us learn and educate better. Through the internet, we can access various online courses, learning resources, library materials, etc., so that we can have a deeper understanding of various knowledge fields to improve our learning ability and level. The internet also provides us with more entertainment. Through the internet, we can access all kinds of videos, games, social media, etc. to enrich our entertainment life. However, there were also some negative effects of the Internet. The internet could also lead to the spread of false information. Through the internet, we can access all kinds of information, but this information may come from unreliable sources, which will cause us to receive wrong information and affect our judgment and decision-making. 2. The Internet could also lead to the leakage of personal privacy. Through the internet, we can easily access all kinds of sensitive personal information such as home address, phone number, etc., which may lead to the risk of personal information leakage. The internet could also lead to the spread of violence and hate speech. Through the internet, we can come into contact with all kinds of extreme speech and violence, which may have a negative impact on society. To sum up, the internet is a tool with both positive and negative effects. We need to use and manage the network correctly to maximize its advantages and avoid its negative effects.