According to the text, it’s correct to affirm that Donald Trump:

Question

Something in the water? Why we love shark films
From the Steven Spielberg classic Jaws, to predators stalking the Seine in Under Paris, there is no shortage of shark films.
Hollywood and audiences love them, seemingly never tiring of the suspense, gore and terror.
There are prehistoric giant sharks in The Meg, genetically engineered ones in Deep Blue Sea, and sharks high on cocaine
in the ingeniously named Cocaine Shark.
Even Donald Trump is a fan – he was reportedly due to play the US president in a Sharknado film, before becoming the
actual president.
I became hooked on them after watching James Bond film Thunderball, where the villain keeps sharks in his swimming pool. It led to a lifelong interest in shark films, as well as an irrational fear of swimming pools, even ones filled with chlorine
inside leisure centres.
Hayley Easton Street is the British director behind a new shark film, Something in the Water, which tells the story of a
group of women stranded at sea.
She explains that, as fan of shark films herself, she “absolutely wanted” to make the movie.
So why are shark movies so popular? “It's the fear of what could be going on with the unknown of [the sea]” she tells BBC News.
“Just being stuck in the middle of the ocean is scary enough. You're trapped in something else's world and anything could
happen.”
But despite Street's love of shark films, she did not want the ones in hers to be portrayed as marine serial killers.
“We kill 100 million sharks every year” she notes.
The director was also aware that the release of Jaws led to a huge rise in the hunting of sharks, partly because they had
been portrayed as merciless killers.
“As much as I love shark films, I love sharks.”
“I was really conscious of that, because it's easy for people to start seeing them as killing machines... or monsters, which
they are not.”
She adds: “I feel it's more scary to have the realistic theme of it, that, you know, if you are out in the ocean and there are
sharks and they do mistake you for something else, they will kill you.”
Despite the huge success of Jaws, Spielberg has said he “truly regrets the decimation of the shark population because of
the book and the film”.
Spielberg is not the only person concerned about Hollywood's portrayal of sharks and the impact it continues to have.
US marine biologist Andriana Fragola dedicates herself to educating people about sharks, often sharing videos of her diving
with them.
She says they are “misunderstood predators” that have been harmed by movies and the media.
Andriana tells me that she has watched Netflix's new shark film, Under Paris, and was not impressed.
“Their whole thing was it's about conservation, about studying them, but then the sharks are still eating people.”
“So it's giving a little bit more of a rounded education and a little bit more depth to the story, it's not just people swimming
at the beach and getting attacked and eaten.”
“But the bottom line and what people can draw from the movie is that sharks are still really dangerous to people and
they're just going to continuously hunt and eat people.”
“If that was true, we would be reduced as a human species. Everyone who goes to the beach, they would be threatened.”
Andriana says the perception of sharks causes a real issue for conservation.
“It's a huge problem because people don't want to protect something that they're scared of.”
“The perception from people is that they're dangerous to humans so we should eradicate them, and that's obviously a
huge problem for conservation and getting people to want to empathise or sympathise with sharks and wanting to actually
protect them.”
“It's unfortunate because 100 million sharks are killed every year, and globally sharks kill fewer than 10 people every year.”
“We're really focused on the sharks being the monsters and them being out to get us. In reality it's the opposite.”
It is unlikely that Hollywood will stop making shark films, or we will stop watching them.
But the figures show that far from being the serial killers of the sea, sharks are actually much more likely to be the victims
of humans.
(Charlotte Gallagher, Culture reporter, BBC 2024. Accessed: 29 July 2024. Available in:<https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckmmgxvp7dgo>. Adapted.) According to the text, it’s correct to affirm that Donald Trump: Alternativa A: Almost played the US President in Sharknado. Ou Alternativa B: Became the US President after playing the role in Sharknado. Ou Alternativa C: Dislikes shark movies because of their damage to actual sharks. Ou Alternativa D: Became friends with Steven Spielberg after playing a role in Jaws.

Qconcursos · Accepted Answer

Alternativa [A] Almost played the US President in Sharknado. Alternativa correta: A — “Almost played the US President in Sharknado.”

Tema central da questão: interpretação de texto focada em localização de informação explícita sobre uma personalidade citada (Donald Trump). O aluno precisa identificar no texto o que foi afirmado e compreender marcadores de tempo e modalizadores (como “reportedly” e “was due to”).

Resumo teórico: em Reading Comprehension, questões de “factual detail” exigem:
- Scanning: procurar nomes próprios (Donald Trump) e verbos-chave.
- Modalizadores: “reportedly” = “segundo relatos”; indica que algo foi reportado, não confirmado/realizado.
- Sequência temporal: “before becoming” indica ordem dos eventos.

Justificativa da alternativa correta (A): o texto informa que Trump era fã de filmes de tubarão e que teria interpretado o presidente dos EUA em um filme da franquia Sharknado, segundo relatos (“reportedly”), mas antes de se tornar presidente de fato. A construção “was due to play” significa “estava previsto/era para interpretar”, reforçando que quase aconteceu, mas não aconteceu. Por isso, “Almost played” é a síntese fiel.

Análise das alternativas incorretas:
B — Afirma que ele se tornou presidente depois de atuar em Sharknado. O texto deixa claro que a participação era apenas prevista e não ocorreu, além de situar o fato antes de ele virar presidente. Dupla distorção: tempo e fato.
C — Diz que ele não gosta de filmes de tubarão por dano aos animais. O texto afirma exatamente o oposto: ele é fã, sem qualquer declaração dele sobre danos a tubarões.
D — Menciona amizade com Spielberg após atuar em Jaws. O texto não indica amizade, e Trump não atuou em Jaws. É uma informação inventada e contraditória.

Estratégias para não errar:
- Sublinhe modalizadores: reportedly (segundo relatos) e estruturas como was due to (estava previsto). Eles mudam o sentido da frase.
- Atente ao tempo: before indica a ordem correta dos eventos.
- Evite inferências além do texto; procure palavras idênticas ou equivalentes na alternativa.

Fontes de apoio:
- BBC News, Charlotte Gallagher (2024) — reportagem cultural citada no texto de apoio.
- Cambridge Assessment English — orientações de Reading (localização de detalhes e compreensão de marcadores de discurso).

Gostou do comentário? Deixe sua avaliação aqui embaixo!

🚀 Quer mais performance?

🚀 Quer mais performance?

According to the text, it’s correct to affirm that Donald Tr...

Gabarito comentado

Clique para visualizar este gabarito

Resumos relacionados

Advérbios e conjunções em inglês para concursos públicos

Artigos (Articles) em inglês: uso em concursos públicos

Questões de assuntos semelhantes

Provas relacionadas