A consumer survey of independent feature films revealed that the

Argument Recap:
The author's argument is that the survey organizers misinterpreted the data because the directors’ experience (not the subject matter) played a role in the films’ ratings. The correct answer will be the one that does not support this idea, while all other options will support the claim that experience, not subject matter, influenced the ratings.

Option-by-option Explanation:
(A) The fact that one has directed a previous hit film is a positive indicator of that director's filmmaking talent.

This supports the author's argument. It suggests that the directors' prior success (experience and talent) influenced the film's appeal, not the subject matter of the film. Since experienced directors are likely to make better films, this undermines the idea that subject matter determined ratings.

(B) Consumer ratings of a new film are influenced by the previous history of success of the film's director.

This supports the author’s argument because it clearly states that consumers' ratings are swayed by the director’s prior success. Again, this suggests that the experience of the director, not the subject matter, likely determined the high ratings.

(C) Action films generally require larger budgets than romance films and are thus prohibitive for many first-time film directors.

This option does not directly support the author's argument about the misinterpretation of the survey data. It highlights the fact that action films have larger budgets, which may prevent first-time directors from working on them, but it doesn’t speak to whether the organizers misinterpreted the role of subject matter in the films' ratings. This is why C is the correct answer—it doesn't directly argue that the survey organizers’ conclusion was wrong.

(D) It is rare for the films of first-time directors to attain the popular appeal of films directed by filmmakers with at least one hit film to their credit.

This supports the author's argument by stating that first-time directors (many of whom directed the romance films) are less likely to produce films with broad appeal compared to experienced directors. This reinforces the idea that director experience, not subject matter, influenced the ratings.

(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.

This supports the author's argument by suggesting that the success of action films could be due to better resources and access to top actors, which experienced directors often have. This again challenges the idea that subject matter alone was responsible for the higher ratings.

Why C is the Correct Answer:
Option C doesn't address whether the survey organizers misinterpreted the data in terms of subject matter influencing ratings. Instead, it talks about the budgets required for different genres, which isn't directly related to the question of whether the directors’ experience or subject matter drove the ratings. Therefore, C is the one that does not support the author's argument, making it the correct answer.

­

KAPLAN OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

The second question based on this stimulus asks us to locate the one answer choice that doesn't strengthen the author's argument, which means we need to locate the odd-man-out. We therefore want to eliminate the four choices that strengthen the connection between the popular appeal of a director's film and that director's having a past hit film; or that strengthen the connection between lack of a hit film and lesser popular appeal. The right answer will be the choice that doesn't support the author's causal link between previous directorial success and the popular appeal of that director's other films.

An 800 test taker expects that some question stems will not be written in the clearest possible manner. Before proceeding to the answer choices in such questions, she pauses for a moment to consider what she's being asked and what kind of answer choice she's looking for, even when it's impossible to specifically prephrase an answer.

(A) If previous hits indicate talent, then the author's theory of the link between previous hit films and popular appeal of the survey films seems more plausible, and we're more likely to believe that the organizers are wrong, as the author maintains, about the effects of subject matter.

(B), (D), and (E) all strengthen the argument by tying past experience of success to present cinematic successes. (B) links previous experience to ratings directly. (D) takes it from another angle and explains that the films of first-timers do not often achieve the same popular appeal as that attained by previous hit-makers. It still strengthens the argument by offering a direct relationship between past success and appeal. (E) links prior experience of success to the ability to obtain the best actors, offering another benefit that accrues to experienced directors and makes them more likely to produce hit films. Like (A), all of these choices make it seem more reasonable to argue that the organizers have misunderstood the role of subject matter in the survey ratings. That is, they all support the author's alternative explanation.

(C) Why many first-time directors don't make action films has no impact on this argument. The fact remains that of the films in this particular survey, the action films were made by more experienced directors while the romances were made by novices, and the author uses this fact to counter a previous conclusion. (C) gives us one possible explanation for this fact, but has no effect on how this fact is used by the author, which, after all, constitutes the crux of her argument. This is the one choice that does not strengthen (or, for that matter, even affect) the author's argument, so it is the right answer here.