A consumer survey of independent feature films revealed that the percentage of action films that received the survey's highest rating was greater than the percentage of romance films that received highest rating. Yet, the survey organisers were probably erroneous in their conclusion that subject matter determines a feature film's popular appeal, since the action films were all directed by filmmakers with at least one hit film to their credit, while the romance films were directed by newer filmmakers, many of whom had not produced a previous film.

Each of the following, if true, supports the author's contention that the organisers misinterpreted the survey data EXCEPT:

A. The fact that one has directed a previous hit film is a positive indicator of that director's filmaking talent
B.Consumer ratings of a new film are influenced by the previous history of success of the film's director.
C.Action films generally require larger budgets than romance films and are thus prohibitive for many first-time film makers.
D.It is rare for films of first time directors to attain the popular appeal of films directed by film makers with at least one hit film to their credit
E.Directors who have produced a previous hit film generally obtain the largest budgets and attract the most talented and well-known actors for their subsequent films

Facts:
1) Survey shows: %age action > % Romance.

2) Filmaker: Subject matter is important.
3) Author : HIT Directors (Action films > Romance films)

ANSWER:
A, B, E aggrees.

C and D.....remains.

C looks better

C was my 2nd choice because of this:

since the action films were all directed by filmmakers with at least one hit film to their credit, while the romance films were directed by newer filmmakers, many of whom had not produced a previous film.

now, C says that newer filmmakes could only produce ROMANCE movie, because ACTION movies cost a lot and are PROHIBITED from production by newbies... doesn't this support the fact mentioned above???

Yeah - I wasn't too sure about this one. The author says the result is wrong because experienced ppl make the action movies. All the options, save C, try to prove that experienced movie-makers have better resources/ratings.

C only shows that newer film-makers tend to make romance movies, but nothing more than that. It does not oppose the authors comment, but it does not support it as well!

At least, thats wt I thought Will wait for OA/OE...

As for your point about E, even in option A a previous hit is a positive indicator about the directors talent, but the directors talent is not something we've been told about! I did think about the point you are making, but...

I still think it is C
whats the OA
_________________

IE IMBA 2010

C for me....

The OA is C.

However, doesn't C and E have very similar line of reasoning? i.e. bigger budgets. Is E eliminated simply b/c it mentions additional items other besides budgets?

jjhko

In the statement it is said that "..action films were all directed by filmmakers with at least one hit film to their credit.."

E says "Directors who have produced a previous hit film generally obtain the largest budgets and attract the most talented and well-known actors for their subsequent films"

As a result, actions films tend have more chances of having higher rating. Here you can see that E is supporting author's statement
_________________

The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short;
the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.