Both of these would get decent scores.
In both, your writing is satisfactory, and your structure is excellent. You also back up your points with examples.
However, both falter when it comes to logic. Your first discusses "IMDB" in term of rating sights, which is 100% out of scope--you're conflating
the rating of the quality of movies with the rating of the appropriateness of those movies content. We're not concerned about whether they are good movies, but about whether children should watch them. Your second essay also fails to point out the major flaw in the argument, which is the fundamental difference in market between cars and motorcycle. You also don't make a compelling point in your third paragraph, which talks about "requirements" in advertisements; this doesn't make sense, at least without context.
Focus on understanding the prompt. Misunderstanding it, or missing a central flaw, will negatively impact your score; spending the time to analyze the prompt in depth before you write will avoid this difficulty!
Prepare with Kaplan and save $150 on a course!