Questões de Vestibular de Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension
Foram encontradas 4.863 questões
Q1348111
Inglês
Texto associado
Considere o texto abaixo para responder a questão.
Democracy and hypocrisy
REMEMBER the opprobrium heaped on Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
Turkey’s prime minister, in June for using tear gas and water-cannon
against his people? Imagine the outrage if Vladimir Putin ordered
Russian troops to fire live ammunition into demonstrators on the streets
of Moscow. But over the weekend, when Egypt’s generals set about
killing scores of protesters, the West responded with furrowed brows
and pleas for all sides to refrain from violence. Such meekness betrays
not only a lack of moral courage, but also a poor sense of where
Egypt’s—and the West’s—real interests lie.
The shooting took place in Cairo early on July 27th near the parade
ground where, three decades earlier, President Anwar Sadat had been
assassinated. Supporters of Muhammad Morsi, ousted in a coup at the
beginning of July, were marching to demand that the army should
restore him to the presidency. Riot police (and their civilian supporters)
opened fire. More than 80 members of the Muslim Brotherhood, Mr
Morsi’s party, died; many more were injured.
[...]
(www.economist.com - acesso em 07/08/2013)
De acordo com o texto, é verdadeiro:
Q1348110
Inglês
Texto associado
Considere o texto abaixo para responder a questão.
Democracy and hypocrisy
REMEMBER the opprobrium heaped on Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
Turkey’s prime minister, in June for using tear gas and water-cannon
against his people? Imagine the outrage if Vladimir Putin ordered
Russian troops to fire live ammunition into demonstrators on the streets
of Moscow. But over the weekend, when Egypt’s generals set about
killing scores of protesters, the West responded with furrowed brows
and pleas for all sides to refrain from violence. Such meekness betrays
not only a lack of moral courage, but also a poor sense of where
Egypt’s—and the West’s—real interests lie.
The shooting took place in Cairo early on July 27th near the parade
ground where, three decades earlier, President Anwar Sadat had been
assassinated. Supporters of Muhammad Morsi, ousted in a coup at the
beginning of July, were marching to demand that the army should
restore him to the presidency. Riot police (and their civilian supporters)
opened fire. More than 80 members of the Muslim Brotherhood, Mr
Morsi’s party, died; many more were injured.
[...]
(www.economist.com - acesso em 07/08/2013)
A reação do Ocidente à atitude do governo do Egito, citada no primeiro parágrafo do texto, foi:
Q1348109
Inglês
Texto associado
Considere o texto sobre as manifestações ocorridas em meados de
2013 no Brasil para responder a questão.
Brazil Leader Suffers Setback on Overhaul
While the president and other politicians have publicly sympathized
with the protesters, passing major changes remains daunting and
demonstrations continue to simmer across the country. Still, some
changes have come at a surprising pace, including harsher penalties for
government corruption and rollbacks of transit fares. Legislation to put
75 percent of oil royalties toward education and 25 percent toward
health care — two areas that have been a focus of the protests — is
moving quickly through Congress.
But political change has proved sticky for Ms. Rousseff. She first called
for a constituent assembly, but withdrew the proposal under criticism from
politicians and legal experts. Then she proposed a plebiscite to be held in
time for changes to take effect by next year’s election, meaning the vote
would have to be held, and subsequent congressional legislation enacted,
by early October.
(www.nytimes.com - acesso em 08/07/2013)
No texto, são mencionadas mudanças reivindicadas pelas manifestações. Assinale a alternativa que apresente uma mudança efetivamente em curso:
Q1348108
Inglês
Texto associado
Considere o texto sobre as manifestações ocorridas em meados de
2013 no Brasil para responder a questão.
Brazil Leader Suffers Setback on Overhaul
While the president and other politicians have publicly sympathized
with the protesters, passing major changes remains daunting and
demonstrations continue to simmer across the country. Still, some
changes have come at a surprising pace, including harsher penalties for
government corruption and rollbacks of transit fares. Legislation to put
75 percent of oil royalties toward education and 25 percent toward
health care — two areas that have been a focus of the protests — is
moving quickly through Congress.
But political change has proved sticky for Ms. Rousseff. She first called
for a constituent assembly, but withdrew the proposal under criticism from
politicians and legal experts. Then she proposed a plebiscite to be held in
time for changes to take effect by next year’s election, meaning the vote
would have to be held, and subsequent congressional legislation enacted,
by early October.
(www.nytimes.com - acesso em 08/07/2013)
De acordo com o primeiro parágrafo do texto, é correto afirmar que:
Q1348107
Inglês
Texto associado
Considere o texto sobre as manifestações ocorridas em meados de
2013 no Brasil para responder a questão.
Brazil Leader Suffers Setback on Overhaul
While the president and other politicians have publicly sympathized
with the protesters, passing major changes remains daunting and
demonstrations continue to simmer across the country. Still, some
changes have come at a surprising pace, including harsher penalties for
government corruption and rollbacks of transit fares. Legislation to put
75 percent of oil royalties toward education and 25 percent toward
health care — two areas that have been a focus of the protests — is
moving quickly through Congress.
But political change has proved sticky for Ms. Rousseff. She first called
for a constituent assembly, but withdrew the proposal under criticism from
politicians and legal experts. Then she proposed a plebiscite to be held in
time for changes to take effect by next year’s election, meaning the vote
would have to be held, and subsequent congressional legislation enacted,
by early October.
(www.nytimes.com - acesso em 08/07/2013)
Baseado nas informações contidas no texto, é correto afirmar que a
Presidenta Dilma Roussef
Q1348106
Inglês
Texto associado
Considere as definições de democracia do humorista Johnny Carson para responder a questão:
“What Democracy Means to Me”
Democracy is people of all races, colors, and creeds united by a single dream: to get rich and move to the suburbs away from people of all races, colors, and creeds. [...]
Democracy is buying a big house you can’t afford with money you don’t have to impress people you wish were dead. And, unlike communism, democracy does not mean having just one ineffective political party; it means having two ineffective political parties. [...]
Yes, democracy means fighting every day for what you deserve, and fighting even harder to keep other weaker people from getting what they deserve. Democracy means never having the Secret Police show up at your door. Of course, it also means never having the cable guy show up at your door. It’s a tradeoff. Democracy means free television. Not good television, but free.
(www.thefaulkingtruth.com - acesso em 07/08/2013)
Em relação às informações sobre o acesso à informação em um sistema democrático, pode-se afirmar mais corretamente que
Q1348105
Inglês
Texto associado
Considere as definições de democracia do humorista Johnny Carson para responder a questão:
“What Democracy Means to Me”
Democracy is people of all races, colors, and creeds united by a single dream: to get rich and move to the suburbs away from people of all races, colors, and creeds. [...]
Democracy is buying a big house you can’t afford with money you don’t have to impress people you wish were dead. And, unlike communism, democracy does not mean having just one ineffective political party; it means having two ineffective political parties. [...]
Yes, democracy means fighting every day for what you deserve, and fighting even harder to keep other weaker people from getting what they deserve. Democracy means never having the Secret Police show up at your door. Of course, it also means never having the cable guy show up at your door. It’s a tradeoff. Democracy means free television. Not good television, but free.
(www.thefaulkingtruth.com - acesso em 07/08/2013)
Segundo o que é afirmado sobre os sistemas democrático e comunista, pode-se inferir que o humorista
Q1348104
Inglês
Texto associado
Considere as definições de democracia do humorista Johnny Carson para responder a questão:
“What Democracy Means to Me”
Democracy is people of all races, colors, and creeds united by a single dream: to get rich and move to the suburbs away from people of all races, colors, and creeds. [...]
Democracy is buying a big house you can’t afford with money you don’t have to impress people you wish were dead. And, unlike communism, democracy does not mean having just one ineffective political party; it means having two ineffective political parties. [...]
Yes, democracy means fighting every day for what you deserve, and fighting even harder to keep other weaker people from getting what they deserve. Democracy means never having the Secret Police show up at your door. Of course, it also means never having the cable guy show up at your door. It’s a tradeoff. Democracy means free television. Not good television, but free.
(www.thefaulkingtruth.com - acesso em 07/08/2013)
Segundo Johnny Carson, a democracia
Ano: 2014
Banca:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie
Órgão:
MACKENZIE
Prova:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie - 2014 - MACKENZIE - vestibular |
Q1347835
Inglês
The sentence that does NOT make sense according to the comic strip is
Ano: 2014
Banca:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie
Órgão:
MACKENZIE
Prova:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie - 2014 - MACKENZIE - vestibular |
Q1347833
Inglês
Texto associado
Female Prisoners Post Sexy Pictures of Themselves on Social Network
ESTELITA HASS CARAZZAI
FROM CURITIBA
FROM CURITIBA
At least two detainees have taken pictures and published them on social networking sites from inside Guarapuava Public Jail, in the state of Paraná.
The pictures, taken on a phone, were found by prison guards and posted online last April.
The 30 year-old detainees are in jail after being accused of drug trafficking. Both are serving provisional sentences, and are yet to be convicted.
One has been in jail since April, and the other for a year.
Detainees are not granted possession of cell phones, and, due to this breach, they were awarded a disciplinary sanction and have since been prevented from receiving visits or food sent by family members for 30 days.
Additionally, this occurrence may prevent them from shortening their sentences if they are eventually convicted.
They appear posing in underwear on concrete beds in the female dormitory, which is decorated with animal print.
After the prison guards discovered the images, they inspected the room the two women shared and found the cell phone used to take the pictures.
“This unfortunately happens. Detainees can hide things very well”, the prison chief, Altemir Nascimento, said.
According to Nascimento, 40 cell phones have been seized so far this year in the prison (which also houses men).
CELL PHONE THROWING
The location of the prison in downtown Guarapuava makes matters worse. According to the prison chief, during sunbathing, pedestrians toss cell phones over the wall.
“Cell phones and drugs are thrown over the wall. This happens regularly. On every sunny day two or three items are thrown”, Nascimento said.
At the beginning of the year, in order to bring the “deliveries” to a halt, the prison chief decided to install a protective net over the patio. Since then 77 cell phones have been caught on the net.
http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/internacional/
The pictures, taken on a phone, were found by prison guards and posted online last April.
The 30 year-old detainees are in jail after being accused of drug trafficking. Both are serving provisional sentences, and are yet to be convicted.
One has been in jail since April, and the other for a year.
Detainees are not granted possession of cell phones, and, due to this breach, they were awarded a disciplinary sanction and have since been prevented from receiving visits or food sent by family members for 30 days.
Additionally, this occurrence may prevent them from shortening their sentences if they are eventually convicted.
They appear posing in underwear on concrete beds in the female dormitory, which is decorated with animal print.
After the prison guards discovered the images, they inspected the room the two women shared and found the cell phone used to take the pictures.
“This unfortunately happens. Detainees can hide things very well”, the prison chief, Altemir Nascimento, said.
According to Nascimento, 40 cell phones have been seized so far this year in the prison (which also houses men).
CELL PHONE THROWING
The location of the prison in downtown Guarapuava makes matters worse. According to the prison chief, during sunbathing, pedestrians toss cell phones over the wall.
“Cell phones and drugs are thrown over the wall. This happens regularly. On every sunny day two or three items are thrown”, Nascimento said.
At the beginning of the year, in order to bring the “deliveries” to a halt, the prison chief decided to install a protective net over the patio. Since then 77 cell phones have been caught on the net.
http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/internacional/
Detainees
Ano: 2014
Banca:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie
Órgão:
MACKENZIE
Prova:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie - 2014 - MACKENZIE - vestibular |
Q1347832
Inglês
Texto associado
Female Prisoners Post Sexy Pictures of Themselves on Social Network
ESTELITA HASS CARAZZAI
FROM CURITIBA
FROM CURITIBA
At least two detainees have taken pictures and published them on social networking sites from inside Guarapuava Public Jail, in the state of Paraná.
The pictures, taken on a phone, were found by prison guards and posted online last April.
The 30 year-old detainees are in jail after being accused of drug trafficking. Both are serving provisional sentences, and are yet to be convicted.
One has been in jail since April, and the other for a year.
Detainees are not granted possession of cell phones, and, due to this breach, they were awarded a disciplinary sanction and have since been prevented from receiving visits or food sent by family members for 30 days.
Additionally, this occurrence may prevent them from shortening their sentences if they are eventually convicted.
They appear posing in underwear on concrete beds in the female dormitory, which is decorated with animal print.
After the prison guards discovered the images, they inspected the room the two women shared and found the cell phone used to take the pictures.
“This unfortunately happens. Detainees can hide things very well”, the prison chief, Altemir Nascimento, said.
According to Nascimento, 40 cell phones have been seized so far this year in the prison (which also houses men).
CELL PHONE THROWING
The location of the prison in downtown Guarapuava makes matters worse. According to the prison chief, during sunbathing, pedestrians toss cell phones over the wall.
“Cell phones and drugs are thrown over the wall. This happens regularly. On every sunny day two or three items are thrown”, Nascimento said.
At the beginning of the year, in order to bring the “deliveries” to a halt, the prison chief decided to install a protective net over the patio. Since then 77 cell phones have been caught on the net.
http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/internacional/
The pictures, taken on a phone, were found by prison guards and posted online last April.
The 30 year-old detainees are in jail after being accused of drug trafficking. Both are serving provisional sentences, and are yet to be convicted.
One has been in jail since April, and the other for a year.
Detainees are not granted possession of cell phones, and, due to this breach, they were awarded a disciplinary sanction and have since been prevented from receiving visits or food sent by family members for 30 days.
Additionally, this occurrence may prevent them from shortening their sentences if they are eventually convicted.
They appear posing in underwear on concrete beds in the female dormitory, which is decorated with animal print.
After the prison guards discovered the images, they inspected the room the two women shared and found the cell phone used to take the pictures.
“This unfortunately happens. Detainees can hide things very well”, the prison chief, Altemir Nascimento, said.
According to Nascimento, 40 cell phones have been seized so far this year in the prison (which also houses men).
CELL PHONE THROWING
The location of the prison in downtown Guarapuava makes matters worse. According to the prison chief, during sunbathing, pedestrians toss cell phones over the wall.
“Cell phones and drugs are thrown over the wall. This happens regularly. On every sunny day two or three items are thrown”, Nascimento said.
At the beginning of the year, in order to bring the “deliveries” to a halt, the prison chief decided to install a protective net over the patio. Since then 77 cell phones have been caught on the net.
http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/internacional/
According to the text,
Ano: 2014
Banca:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie
Órgão:
MACKENZIE
Prova:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie - 2014 - MACKENZIE - vestibular |
Q1347831
Inglês
Texto associado
The Rolling Stones Impose High Ticket Prices for U.S. Tour
“Is that a lot?” says Mick Jagger
By Jerry Hopkins November 15, 1969
Mick Jagger performing on stage circa 1969.
It begins with two evening shows at the Forum in Los Angeles November 8th, with tickets priced from $5.50 to $8.50. (This compares to a $7.50 top price for a Blind Faith concert in the same arena, a $6.50 top for the Doors. And in both those concerts, tickets started at $3.50.) In arranging this show, a previously-set hockey game between the Los Angeles Kings and the New York Rangers was rescheduled – at the request of the man who owns both the Forum and the Kings.
Acts appearing at the concerts here will include Terry Reid, who will appear on all the dates, and the Ike and Tina Turner Revue. Negotiations were continuing to have Ike and Tina, B. B. King and Chuck Berry join the Stones in several other cities.
Promoters of the L.A. concerts said the gross for the evening would exceed $275,000 if the Stones filled the 18,000 seats in the Forum both shows. Similar grosses, on a per show basis, were expected throughout the tour, with the Stones getting guarantees of $25,000 a concert and up, against take home percentages running close to $60,000.
“Can the Rolling Stones actually need all that money?” Gleason asked. “If they really dig the black musicians as much as every note they play and every syllable they utter indicates, is it possible to take out a show with, say, Ike and Tina and some of the older men like Howlin’ Wolf and let them share in the loot? How much can the Stones take back to Merrie England after taxes, anyway? How much must the British manager and the American manager and the agency rake off the top?”
“Paying five, six and seven dollars for a Stones concert at the Oakland Coliseum for, say, an hour of the Stones seen a quarter of a mile away because the artists demand such outrageous fees that they can only be obtained under these circumstances, says a very bad thing to me about the artists’ attitude towards the public. It says they despise their own audience.”
When Mick Jagger was confronted by this criticism at a press conference at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel, he left the door slightly open to giving a free concert sometime during the 13-city, 18-concert tour, but his tone didn’t seem too promising.
“There has been talk of that,” he said. “I should think toward the end. We’ll have to see how things go. I don’t want to plan that right now, ‘cause we’re gonna be here some while. We’ve got time for all that. I don’t want to say that’s what we want to do or not do. I’m leaving it rather blurry. I’m not committing myself.”
And about the ticket cost, he strongly indicated that if some people thought prices were high, they might have been a lot worse.
“We were offered a lot of money to do some very good dates – money in front in Europe, before we left, really a lot of bread. We didn’t accept because we thought they’d be too expensive on the basis of the money we’d get. We didn’t say that unless we walk out of America with X dollars, we ain’t gonna come. We’re really not into that sort of economic scene. Either you’re gonna sing and all that crap, or you’re gonna be an economist. I really don’t know whether this is more expensive than recent tours by local bands. I don’t know how much people can afford. I’ve no idea. Is that a lot? You’ll have to tell me.”
www.rollingstone.com
Mick Jagger performing on stage circa 1969.
LOS ANGELES—The Rolling Stones have returned to the United States
for their first tour in more than three years.
It begins with two evening shows at the Forum in Los Angeles November 8th, with tickets priced from $5.50 to $8.50. (This compares to a $7.50 top price for a Blind Faith concert in the same arena, a $6.50 top for the Doors. And in both those concerts, tickets started at $3.50.) In arranging this show, a previously-set hockey game between the Los Angeles Kings and the New York Rangers was rescheduled – at the request of the man who owns both the Forum and the Kings.
Acts appearing at the concerts here will include Terry Reid, who will appear on all the dates, and the Ike and Tina Turner Revue. Negotiations were continuing to have Ike and Tina, B. B. King and Chuck Berry join the Stones in several other cities.
Promoters of the L.A. concerts said the gross for the evening would exceed $275,000 if the Stones filled the 18,000 seats in the Forum both shows. Similar grosses, on a per show basis, were expected throughout the tour, with the Stones getting guarantees of $25,000 a concert and up, against take home percentages running close to $60,000.
Although figures such as these are not unusual for tours by groups of
this magnitude, they did bring strong criticism from, among others, Ralph
Gleason in the San Francisco Chronicle.
“Can the Rolling Stones actually need all that money?” Gleason asked. “If they really dig the black musicians as much as every note they play and every syllable they utter indicates, is it possible to take out a show with, say, Ike and Tina and some of the older men like Howlin’ Wolf and let them share in the loot? How much can the Stones take back to Merrie England after taxes, anyway? How much must the British manager and the American manager and the agency rake off the top?”
“Paying five, six and seven dollars for a Stones concert at the Oakland Coliseum for, say, an hour of the Stones seen a quarter of a mile away because the artists demand such outrageous fees that they can only be obtained under these circumstances, says a very bad thing to me about the artists’ attitude towards the public. It says they despise their own audience.”
When Mick Jagger was confronted by this criticism at a press conference at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel, he left the door slightly open to giving a free concert sometime during the 13-city, 18-concert tour, but his tone didn’t seem too promising.
“There has been talk of that,” he said. “I should think toward the end. We’ll have to see how things go. I don’t want to plan that right now, ‘cause we’re gonna be here some while. We’ve got time for all that. I don’t want to say that’s what we want to do or not do. I’m leaving it rather blurry. I’m not committing myself.”
And about the ticket cost, he strongly indicated that if some people thought prices were high, they might have been a lot worse.
“We were offered a lot of money to do some very good dates – money in front in Europe, before we left, really a lot of bread. We didn’t accept because we thought they’d be too expensive on the basis of the money we’d get. We didn’t say that unless we walk out of America with X dollars, we ain’t gonna come. We’re really not into that sort of economic scene. Either you’re gonna sing and all that crap, or you’re gonna be an economist. I really don’t know whether this is more expensive than recent tours by local bands. I don’t know how much people can afford. I’ve no idea. Is that a lot? You’ll have to tell me.”
www.rollingstone.com
The question that the promoters were asked and whose answer can be found in
the phrase from $5.50 to $8.50 was probably:
Ano: 2014
Banca:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie
Órgão:
MACKENZIE
Prova:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie - 2014 - MACKENZIE - vestibular |
Q1347830
Inglês
Texto associado
The Rolling Stones Impose High Ticket Prices for U.S. Tour
“Is that a lot?” says Mick Jagger
By Jerry Hopkins November 15, 1969
Mick Jagger performing on stage circa 1969.
It begins with two evening shows at the Forum in Los Angeles November 8th, with tickets priced from $5.50 to $8.50. (This compares to a $7.50 top price for a Blind Faith concert in the same arena, a $6.50 top for the Doors. And in both those concerts, tickets started at $3.50.) In arranging this show, a previously-set hockey game between the Los Angeles Kings and the New York Rangers was rescheduled – at the request of the man who owns both the Forum and the Kings.
Acts appearing at the concerts here will include Terry Reid, who will appear on all the dates, and the Ike and Tina Turner Revue. Negotiations were continuing to have Ike and Tina, B. B. King and Chuck Berry join the Stones in several other cities.
Promoters of the L.A. concerts said the gross for the evening would exceed $275,000 if the Stones filled the 18,000 seats in the Forum both shows. Similar grosses, on a per show basis, were expected throughout the tour, with the Stones getting guarantees of $25,000 a concert and up, against take home percentages running close to $60,000.
“Can the Rolling Stones actually need all that money?” Gleason asked. “If they really dig the black musicians as much as every note they play and every syllable they utter indicates, is it possible to take out a show with, say, Ike and Tina and some of the older men like Howlin’ Wolf and let them share in the loot? How much can the Stones take back to Merrie England after taxes, anyway? How much must the British manager and the American manager and the agency rake off the top?”
“Paying five, six and seven dollars for a Stones concert at the Oakland Coliseum for, say, an hour of the Stones seen a quarter of a mile away because the artists demand such outrageous fees that they can only be obtained under these circumstances, says a very bad thing to me about the artists’ attitude towards the public. It says they despise their own audience.”
When Mick Jagger was confronted by this criticism at a press conference at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel, he left the door slightly open to giving a free concert sometime during the 13-city, 18-concert tour, but his tone didn’t seem too promising.
“There has been talk of that,” he said. “I should think toward the end. We’ll have to see how things go. I don’t want to plan that right now, ‘cause we’re gonna be here some while. We’ve got time for all that. I don’t want to say that’s what we want to do or not do. I’m leaving it rather blurry. I’m not committing myself.”
And about the ticket cost, he strongly indicated that if some people thought prices were high, they might have been a lot worse.
“We were offered a lot of money to do some very good dates – money in front in Europe, before we left, really a lot of bread. We didn’t accept because we thought they’d be too expensive on the basis of the money we’d get. We didn’t say that unless we walk out of America with X dollars, we ain’t gonna come. We’re really not into that sort of economic scene. Either you’re gonna sing and all that crap, or you’re gonna be an economist. I really don’t know whether this is more expensive than recent tours by local bands. I don’t know how much people can afford. I’ve no idea. Is that a lot? You’ll have to tell me.”
www.rollingstone.com
Mick Jagger performing on stage circa 1969.
LOS ANGELES—The Rolling Stones have returned to the United States
for their first tour in more than three years.
It begins with two evening shows at the Forum in Los Angeles November 8th, with tickets priced from $5.50 to $8.50. (This compares to a $7.50 top price for a Blind Faith concert in the same arena, a $6.50 top for the Doors. And in both those concerts, tickets started at $3.50.) In arranging this show, a previously-set hockey game between the Los Angeles Kings and the New York Rangers was rescheduled – at the request of the man who owns both the Forum and the Kings.
Acts appearing at the concerts here will include Terry Reid, who will appear on all the dates, and the Ike and Tina Turner Revue. Negotiations were continuing to have Ike and Tina, B. B. King and Chuck Berry join the Stones in several other cities.
Promoters of the L.A. concerts said the gross for the evening would exceed $275,000 if the Stones filled the 18,000 seats in the Forum both shows. Similar grosses, on a per show basis, were expected throughout the tour, with the Stones getting guarantees of $25,000 a concert and up, against take home percentages running close to $60,000.
Although figures such as these are not unusual for tours by groups of
this magnitude, they did bring strong criticism from, among others, Ralph
Gleason in the San Francisco Chronicle.
“Can the Rolling Stones actually need all that money?” Gleason asked. “If they really dig the black musicians as much as every note they play and every syllable they utter indicates, is it possible to take out a show with, say, Ike and Tina and some of the older men like Howlin’ Wolf and let them share in the loot? How much can the Stones take back to Merrie England after taxes, anyway? How much must the British manager and the American manager and the agency rake off the top?”
“Paying five, six and seven dollars for a Stones concert at the Oakland Coliseum for, say, an hour of the Stones seen a quarter of a mile away because the artists demand such outrageous fees that they can only be obtained under these circumstances, says a very bad thing to me about the artists’ attitude towards the public. It says they despise their own audience.”
When Mick Jagger was confronted by this criticism at a press conference at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel, he left the door slightly open to giving a free concert sometime during the 13-city, 18-concert tour, but his tone didn’t seem too promising.
“There has been talk of that,” he said. “I should think toward the end. We’ll have to see how things go. I don’t want to plan that right now, ‘cause we’re gonna be here some while. We’ve got time for all that. I don’t want to say that’s what we want to do or not do. I’m leaving it rather blurry. I’m not committing myself.”
And about the ticket cost, he strongly indicated that if some people thought prices were high, they might have been a lot worse.
“We were offered a lot of money to do some very good dates – money in front in Europe, before we left, really a lot of bread. We didn’t accept because we thought they’d be too expensive on the basis of the money we’d get. We didn’t say that unless we walk out of America with X dollars, we ain’t gonna come. We’re really not into that sort of economic scene. Either you’re gonna sing and all that crap, or you’re gonna be an economist. I really don’t know whether this is more expensive than recent tours by local bands. I don’t know how much people can afford. I’ve no idea. Is that a lot? You’ll have to tell me.”
www.rollingstone.com
The text explains that
Ano: 2014
Banca:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie
Órgão:
MACKENZIE
Prova:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie - 2014 - MACKENZIE - vestibular |
Q1347829
Inglês
Texto associado
The Rolling Stones Impose High Ticket Prices for U.S. Tour
“Is that a lot?” says Mick Jagger
By Jerry Hopkins November 15, 1969
Mick Jagger performing on stage circa 1969.
It begins with two evening shows at the Forum in Los Angeles November 8th, with tickets priced from $5.50 to $8.50. (This compares to a $7.50 top price for a Blind Faith concert in the same arena, a $6.50 top for the Doors. And in both those concerts, tickets started at $3.50.) In arranging this show, a previously-set hockey game between the Los Angeles Kings and the New York Rangers was rescheduled – at the request of the man who owns both the Forum and the Kings.
Acts appearing at the concerts here will include Terry Reid, who will appear on all the dates, and the Ike and Tina Turner Revue. Negotiations were continuing to have Ike and Tina, B. B. King and Chuck Berry join the Stones in several other cities.
Promoters of the L.A. concerts said the gross for the evening would exceed $275,000 if the Stones filled the 18,000 seats in the Forum both shows. Similar grosses, on a per show basis, were expected throughout the tour, with the Stones getting guarantees of $25,000 a concert and up, against take home percentages running close to $60,000.
“Can the Rolling Stones actually need all that money?” Gleason asked. “If they really dig the black musicians as much as every note they play and every syllable they utter indicates, is it possible to take out a show with, say, Ike and Tina and some of the older men like Howlin’ Wolf and let them share in the loot? How much can the Stones take back to Merrie England after taxes, anyway? How much must the British manager and the American manager and the agency rake off the top?”
“Paying five, six and seven dollars for a Stones concert at the Oakland Coliseum for, say, an hour of the Stones seen a quarter of a mile away because the artists demand such outrageous fees that they can only be obtained under these circumstances, says a very bad thing to me about the artists’ attitude towards the public. It says they despise their own audience.”
When Mick Jagger was confronted by this criticism at a press conference at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel, he left the door slightly open to giving a free concert sometime during the 13-city, 18-concert tour, but his tone didn’t seem too promising.
“There has been talk of that,” he said. “I should think toward the end. We’ll have to see how things go. I don’t want to plan that right now, ‘cause we’re gonna be here some while. We’ve got time for all that. I don’t want to say that’s what we want to do or not do. I’m leaving it rather blurry. I’m not committing myself.”
And about the ticket cost, he strongly indicated that if some people thought prices were high, they might have been a lot worse.
“We were offered a lot of money to do some very good dates – money in front in Europe, before we left, really a lot of bread. We didn’t accept because we thought they’d be too expensive on the basis of the money we’d get. We didn’t say that unless we walk out of America with X dollars, we ain’t gonna come. We’re really not into that sort of economic scene. Either you’re gonna sing and all that crap, or you’re gonna be an economist. I really don’t know whether this is more expensive than recent tours by local bands. I don’t know how much people can afford. I’ve no idea. Is that a lot? You’ll have to tell me.”
www.rollingstone.com
Mick Jagger performing on stage circa 1969.
LOS ANGELES—The Rolling Stones have returned to the United States
for their first tour in more than three years.
It begins with two evening shows at the Forum in Los Angeles November 8th, with tickets priced from $5.50 to $8.50. (This compares to a $7.50 top price for a Blind Faith concert in the same arena, a $6.50 top for the Doors. And in both those concerts, tickets started at $3.50.) In arranging this show, a previously-set hockey game between the Los Angeles Kings and the New York Rangers was rescheduled – at the request of the man who owns both the Forum and the Kings.
Acts appearing at the concerts here will include Terry Reid, who will appear on all the dates, and the Ike and Tina Turner Revue. Negotiations were continuing to have Ike and Tina, B. B. King and Chuck Berry join the Stones in several other cities.
Promoters of the L.A. concerts said the gross for the evening would exceed $275,000 if the Stones filled the 18,000 seats in the Forum both shows. Similar grosses, on a per show basis, were expected throughout the tour, with the Stones getting guarantees of $25,000 a concert and up, against take home percentages running close to $60,000.
Although figures such as these are not unusual for tours by groups of
this magnitude, they did bring strong criticism from, among others, Ralph
Gleason in the San Francisco Chronicle.
“Can the Rolling Stones actually need all that money?” Gleason asked. “If they really dig the black musicians as much as every note they play and every syllable they utter indicates, is it possible to take out a show with, say, Ike and Tina and some of the older men like Howlin’ Wolf and let them share in the loot? How much can the Stones take back to Merrie England after taxes, anyway? How much must the British manager and the American manager and the agency rake off the top?”
“Paying five, six and seven dollars for a Stones concert at the Oakland Coliseum for, say, an hour of the Stones seen a quarter of a mile away because the artists demand such outrageous fees that they can only be obtained under these circumstances, says a very bad thing to me about the artists’ attitude towards the public. It says they despise their own audience.”
When Mick Jagger was confronted by this criticism at a press conference at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel, he left the door slightly open to giving a free concert sometime during the 13-city, 18-concert tour, but his tone didn’t seem too promising.
“There has been talk of that,” he said. “I should think toward the end. We’ll have to see how things go. I don’t want to plan that right now, ‘cause we’re gonna be here some while. We’ve got time for all that. I don’t want to say that’s what we want to do or not do. I’m leaving it rather blurry. I’m not committing myself.”
And about the ticket cost, he strongly indicated that if some people thought prices were high, they might have been a lot worse.
“We were offered a lot of money to do some very good dates – money in front in Europe, before we left, really a lot of bread. We didn’t accept because we thought they’d be too expensive on the basis of the money we’d get. We didn’t say that unless we walk out of America with X dollars, we ain’t gonna come. We’re really not into that sort of economic scene. Either you’re gonna sing and all that crap, or you’re gonna be an economist. I really don’t know whether this is more expensive than recent tours by local bands. I don’t know how much people can afford. I’ve no idea. Is that a lot? You’ll have to tell me.”
www.rollingstone.com
According to the text, the Rolling Stones
Ano: 2013
Banca:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie
Órgão:
MACKENZIE
Prova:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie - 2013 - MACKENZIE - vestibular |
Q1347203
Inglês
According to the cartoon,
Ano: 2013
Banca:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie
Órgão:
MACKENZIE
Prova:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie - 2013 - MACKENZIE - vestibular |
Q1347202
Inglês
Texto associado
Django Unchained review:
A truly wild Western with a killer line-up
Review of Oscar-nominated film by Sunday Mirror film critic Mark Adam.
SONY PICTURES
A truly wild Western with a killer line-up
Review of Oscar-nominated film by Sunday Mirror film critic Mark Adam.
SONY PICTURES
THE STARS
Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz, Leonardo DiCaprio, Samuel L Jackson, Walton Goggins, Kerry Washington.
THE STORY
Two years before the start of the Civil War, the unlikely partnership of German bounty hunter Dr King Schultz (Waltz) and Django (Foxx) – the slave he recently freed – set about making money tracking and killing outlaws.
But Django also has plans to rescue his wife Broomhilda (Washington) from charismatic but cruel Mississippi plantation owner Calvin Candie (DiCaprio).
THE VERDICT
When Quentin Tarantino decides to make a Western, you know it’s going to be epic, violent, funny, exciting and challenging. And this wonderfully irreverent and distinctively bloody take on the wild Wild West hits the spot, brimming with delightfully oddball characters and racy style.
This is obviously not your run-of-the-mill cowboy tale. Instead, Tarantino flies close to controversy by setting his story against the violent and brutal backdrop of the slave trade.
As usual his casting is spot on. Waltz (who won an Oscar for his evil Nazi role in Tarantino’s last film Inglourious Basterds) is smooth perfection as a German dentist/bounty hunter and is wonderfully complemented by Jamie Foxx’s steely-eyed former slave.
The early bonding scenes of them tracking redneck villains (Django relishes the fact he can make money killing “white folk”) are amusingly and snappily shot.
Initially, Tarantino pokes fun at the rampant and casual racism of the period – hilariously so in a scene involving a Ku Klux Klan mob complaining about eye holes in their hoods??– but things turn nastier when Schultz and Django attempt to rescue Broomhilda.
Leonardo DiCaprio has a fine old time as the brutal Candie and absolutely oozes slippery cruelty. But he manages to be out-acted by Tarantino regular Samuel L Jackson, playing an elderly slave and close confidant of Candie who is as menacing and controlling as his supposed master.
Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz, Leonardo DiCaprio, Samuel L Jackson, Walton Goggins, Kerry Washington.
THE STORY
Two years before the start of the Civil War, the unlikely partnership of German bounty hunter Dr King Schultz (Waltz) and Django (Foxx) – the slave he recently freed – set about making money tracking and killing outlaws.
But Django also has plans to rescue his wife Broomhilda (Washington) from charismatic but cruel Mississippi plantation owner Calvin Candie (DiCaprio).
THE VERDICT
When Quentin Tarantino decides to make a Western, you know it’s going to be epic, violent, funny, exciting and challenging. And this wonderfully irreverent and distinctively bloody take on the wild Wild West hits the spot, brimming with delightfully oddball characters and racy style.
This is obviously not your run-of-the-mill cowboy tale. Instead, Tarantino flies close to controversy by setting his story against the violent and brutal backdrop of the slave trade.
As usual his casting is spot on. Waltz (who won an Oscar for his evil Nazi role in Tarantino’s last film Inglourious Basterds) is smooth perfection as a German dentist/bounty hunter and is wonderfully complemented by Jamie Foxx’s steely-eyed former slave.
The early bonding scenes of them tracking redneck villains (Django relishes the fact he can make money killing “white folk”) are amusingly and snappily shot.
Initially, Tarantino pokes fun at the rampant and casual racism of the period – hilariously so in a scene involving a Ku Klux Klan mob complaining about eye holes in their hoods??– but things turn nastier when Schultz and Django attempt to rescue Broomhilda.
Leonardo DiCaprio has a fine old time as the brutal Candie and absolutely oozes slippery cruelty. But he manages to be out-acted by Tarantino regular Samuel L Jackson, playing an elderly slave and close confidant of Candie who is as menacing and controlling as his supposed master.
The meanings of the words “bounty hunter”, “run-of-the-mill” and “redneck”
in the text are, respectively,
Ano: 2013
Banca:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie
Órgão:
MACKENZIE
Prova:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie - 2013 - MACKENZIE - vestibular |
Q1347201
Inglês
Texto associado
Django Unchained review:
A truly wild Western with a killer line-up
Review of Oscar-nominated film by Sunday Mirror film critic Mark Adam.
SONY PICTURES
A truly wild Western with a killer line-up
Review of Oscar-nominated film by Sunday Mirror film critic Mark Adam.
SONY PICTURES
THE STARS
Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz, Leonardo DiCaprio, Samuel L Jackson, Walton Goggins, Kerry Washington.
THE STORY
Two years before the start of the Civil War, the unlikely partnership of German bounty hunter Dr King Schultz (Waltz) and Django (Foxx) – the slave he recently freed – set about making money tracking and killing outlaws.
But Django also has plans to rescue his wife Broomhilda (Washington) from charismatic but cruel Mississippi plantation owner Calvin Candie (DiCaprio).
THE VERDICT
When Quentin Tarantino decides to make a Western, you know it’s going to be epic, violent, funny, exciting and challenging. And this wonderfully irreverent and distinctively bloody take on the wild Wild West hits the spot, brimming with delightfully oddball characters and racy style.
This is obviously not your run-of-the-mill cowboy tale. Instead, Tarantino flies close to controversy by setting his story against the violent and brutal backdrop of the slave trade.
As usual his casting is spot on. Waltz (who won an Oscar for his evil Nazi role in Tarantino’s last film Inglourious Basterds) is smooth perfection as a German dentist/bounty hunter and is wonderfully complemented by Jamie Foxx’s steely-eyed former slave.
The early bonding scenes of them tracking redneck villains (Django relishes the fact he can make money killing “white folk”) are amusingly and snappily shot.
Initially, Tarantino pokes fun at the rampant and casual racism of the period – hilariously so in a scene involving a Ku Klux Klan mob complaining about eye holes in their hoods??– but things turn nastier when Schultz and Django attempt to rescue Broomhilda.
Leonardo DiCaprio has a fine old time as the brutal Candie and absolutely oozes slippery cruelty. But he manages to be out-acted by Tarantino regular Samuel L Jackson, playing an elderly slave and close confidant of Candie who is as menacing and controlling as his supposed master.
Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz, Leonardo DiCaprio, Samuel L Jackson, Walton Goggins, Kerry Washington.
THE STORY
Two years before the start of the Civil War, the unlikely partnership of German bounty hunter Dr King Schultz (Waltz) and Django (Foxx) – the slave he recently freed – set about making money tracking and killing outlaws.
But Django also has plans to rescue his wife Broomhilda (Washington) from charismatic but cruel Mississippi plantation owner Calvin Candie (DiCaprio).
THE VERDICT
When Quentin Tarantino decides to make a Western, you know it’s going to be epic, violent, funny, exciting and challenging. And this wonderfully irreverent and distinctively bloody take on the wild Wild West hits the spot, brimming with delightfully oddball characters and racy style.
This is obviously not your run-of-the-mill cowboy tale. Instead, Tarantino flies close to controversy by setting his story against the violent and brutal backdrop of the slave trade.
As usual his casting is spot on. Waltz (who won an Oscar for his evil Nazi role in Tarantino’s last film Inglourious Basterds) is smooth perfection as a German dentist/bounty hunter and is wonderfully complemented by Jamie Foxx’s steely-eyed former slave.
The early bonding scenes of them tracking redneck villains (Django relishes the fact he can make money killing “white folk”) are amusingly and snappily shot.
Initially, Tarantino pokes fun at the rampant and casual racism of the period – hilariously so in a scene involving a Ku Klux Klan mob complaining about eye holes in their hoods??– but things turn nastier when Schultz and Django attempt to rescue Broomhilda.
Leonardo DiCaprio has a fine old time as the brutal Candie and absolutely oozes slippery cruelty. But he manages to be out-acted by Tarantino regular Samuel L Jackson, playing an elderly slave and close confidant of Candie who is as menacing and controlling as his supposed master.
According to the movie review,
Ano: 2013
Banca:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie
Órgão:
MACKENZIE
Prova:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie - 2013 - MACKENZIE - vestibular |
Q1347200
Inglês
Texto associado
Behind the Meaning of the Pope’s Names
The new pope’s choice of ‘Francis’ hints at the direction of his reign.
The new pope’s choice of ‘Francis’ hints at the direction of his reign.
Enter Pope Francis. The first Jesuit pope. The first from Latin
America. It is, indeed, a historic moment for the papacy. Those who waited
for a leader from the new Catholic world will no doubt be __( I )__ by
the choice, but his new status as the leader of a global church requires
a different persona and a new mode of action. The new pope speaks not
only for Argentina, Latin America, and the Jesuits, but also for the entire
Roman Catholic world.
The first Jesuit pope. The first from Latin America. (Enrique Marcarian/Reuters)
The first Jesuit pope. The first from Latin America. (Enrique Marcarian/Reuters)
It is precisely for this reason that cardinals shed their names along
with their brightly __( II )__ vestments. Historically, the tradition of
selecting a new papal name dates back to the sixth century, when Pope
John II swapped his awkwardly __( III )__ name Mercurius for the solidly
Christian John. At the same time the selection of religious names is more
than an opportunity to symbolically cast aside individual identity. Papal
names chart a course for the future by summoning up the past. The new
pope assumes either the mantle of religious heroes and leaders from days
gone by or the virtues of the Innocents and the Piuses. The selection of
the name both forges a new identity and signals how the pope wishes to
be seen and remembered. It is, in essence, not only the answer to the
__( IV )__ question “Who do you want to be when you grow up?” but
also a way of preemptively writing one’s own reviews.
Traditionally popes have been __( V )__ of reaching too high, of appearing too self-congratulatory. The office of the pope is built, literally and metaphorically, on the legacy of St. Peter, the apostle of Christ, whose remains lie beneath the papal seat in the Vatican. But there has been no Pope Peter II. Thus far, no pope has had the audacity to present himself as standing in continuity with the favored disciple of Jesus. Nor would Pope Francis have been able to select the name of the founder of his own order. A Pope Ignatius—after Jesuit founder Ignatius of Loyola—would have appeared self-serving.
At first blush, Pope Francis’s selection of a previously __( VI )__ papal name—he is no 23rd anything—marks a break with the past and augurs well for those looking for a move away from deeply entrenched institutionalism. The new pope symbolically clears the deck for a new period of Catholic history. For a church desperately in need of an administrative makeover, it creates a nominally blank slate for the pale-garbed pontiff.
Traditionally popes have been __( V )__ of reaching too high, of appearing too self-congratulatory. The office of the pope is built, literally and metaphorically, on the legacy of St. Peter, the apostle of Christ, whose remains lie beneath the papal seat in the Vatican. But there has been no Pope Peter II. Thus far, no pope has had the audacity to present himself as standing in continuity with the favored disciple of Jesus. Nor would Pope Francis have been able to select the name of the founder of his own order. A Pope Ignatius—after Jesuit founder Ignatius of Loyola—would have appeared self-serving.
At first blush, Pope Francis’s selection of a previously __( VI )__ papal name—he is no 23rd anything—marks a break with the past and augurs well for those looking for a move away from deeply entrenched institutionalism. The new pope symbolically clears the deck for a new period of Catholic history. For a church desperately in need of an administrative makeover, it creates a nominally blank slate for the pale-garbed pontiff.
Newsweek
The adjectives that properly fill in blanks I, II, III, IV, V and VI, in the text, are
Ano: 2013
Banca:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie
Órgão:
MACKENZIE
Prova:
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie - 2013 - MACKENZIE - vestibular |
Q1347199
Inglês
Texto associado
Behind the Meaning of the Pope’s Names
The new pope’s choice of ‘Francis’ hints at the direction of his reign.
The new pope’s choice of ‘Francis’ hints at the direction of his reign.
Enter Pope Francis. The first Jesuit pope. The first from Latin
America. It is, indeed, a historic moment for the papacy. Those who waited
for a leader from the new Catholic world will no doubt be __( I )__ by
the choice, but his new status as the leader of a global church requires
a different persona and a new mode of action. The new pope speaks not
only for Argentina, Latin America, and the Jesuits, but also for the entire
Roman Catholic world.
The first Jesuit pope. The first from Latin America. (Enrique Marcarian/Reuters)
The first Jesuit pope. The first from Latin America. (Enrique Marcarian/Reuters)
It is precisely for this reason that cardinals shed their names along
with their brightly __( II )__ vestments. Historically, the tradition of
selecting a new papal name dates back to the sixth century, when Pope
John II swapped his awkwardly __( III )__ name Mercurius for the solidly
Christian John. At the same time the selection of religious names is more
than an opportunity to symbolically cast aside individual identity. Papal
names chart a course for the future by summoning up the past. The new
pope assumes either the mantle of religious heroes and leaders from days
gone by or the virtues of the Innocents and the Piuses. The selection of
the name both forges a new identity and signals how the pope wishes to
be seen and remembered. It is, in essence, not only the answer to the
__( IV )__ question “Who do you want to be when you grow up?” but
also a way of preemptively writing one’s own reviews.
Traditionally popes have been __( V )__ of reaching too high, of appearing too self-congratulatory. The office of the pope is built, literally and metaphorically, on the legacy of St. Peter, the apostle of Christ, whose remains lie beneath the papal seat in the Vatican. But there has been no Pope Peter II. Thus far, no pope has had the audacity to present himself as standing in continuity with the favored disciple of Jesus. Nor would Pope Francis have been able to select the name of the founder of his own order. A Pope Ignatius—after Jesuit founder Ignatius of Loyola—would have appeared self-serving.
At first blush, Pope Francis’s selection of a previously __( VI )__ papal name—he is no 23rd anything—marks a break with the past and augurs well for those looking for a move away from deeply entrenched institutionalism. The new pope symbolically clears the deck for a new period of Catholic history. For a church desperately in need of an administrative makeover, it creates a nominally blank slate for the pale-garbed pontiff.
Traditionally popes have been __( V )__ of reaching too high, of appearing too self-congratulatory. The office of the pope is built, literally and metaphorically, on the legacy of St. Peter, the apostle of Christ, whose remains lie beneath the papal seat in the Vatican. But there has been no Pope Peter II. Thus far, no pope has had the audacity to present himself as standing in continuity with the favored disciple of Jesus. Nor would Pope Francis have been able to select the name of the founder of his own order. A Pope Ignatius—after Jesuit founder Ignatius of Loyola—would have appeared self-serving.
At first blush, Pope Francis’s selection of a previously __( VI )__ papal name—he is no 23rd anything—marks a break with the past and augurs well for those looking for a move away from deeply entrenched institutionalism. The new pope symbolically clears the deck for a new period of Catholic history. For a church desperately in need of an administrative makeover, it creates a nominally blank slate for the pale-garbed pontiff.
Newsweek
The article clearly states that
Ano: 2011
Banca:
COMPERVE - UFRN
Órgão:
UFRN
Prova:
COMPERVE - 2011 - UFRN - Vestibular - 1º DIA - INGLÊS |
Q1346855
Inglês
Cécile Duvelle questiona se, após sessenta
anos, tivemos êxito em assegurar
Conheça nossos planos