Film director: It's inaccurate to say that filmgoers stayed away fro

We need to strengthen the director's explanation. This is what the explanation is:
He says that his movie got a small audience because the moviegoers (to whom this kind of movie appeals) got split among many movies (that appeal to the same group of moviegoers) that were playing.
For example, say the director's movie is a spy thriller A which appeals to the 15 - 25 age group. Say the same age group likes Sci-fi too and there are 3 sci-fi movies playing over the same weekend. So the people in this age group get split among the 4 movies. We need to strengthen his explanation.

(A) The film director's film received no positive reviews.
Does not help the director's case.

(B) Filmgoers seldom see more than one film in a weekend.
This helps. One might argue that the moviegoers could have watched all the movies that appealed to them so having multiple movies playing may have had no impact. But if filmgoers watch only one movie over a weekend, they will watch only one of the 4 movies that appeal to them. So if a single movie were playing over the weekend, all 100% may watch that. But if 4 movies that appeal to them were playing, using equal probabilities, only 25% moviegoers will watch it if they will watch only one movie. This strengthens the director's explanation.

(C) The total number of filmgoers was larger than average on the weekend the film director's film opened.
The total number of filmgoers doesn't impact the director's explanation at all.

(D) Each of the other films that the film director alludes to receive one or two positive reviews.
We cannot compare the films based on number of positive/negative reviews and whether they could have impacted the audience's decision without more information.

(E) Most filmgoers are drawn to a variety of kinds of film.
Note what the argument tells us: "it was competing with several other films that appeal to the same type of filmgoer that mine does, and the number of such viewers is relatively small"
Even if most filmgoers are drawn to a variety of kinds of film, the number of viewers drawn to his kind of film is relatively small. The problem was that this small group got split due to other appealing movies playing over the same weekend.
This option doesn't impact the director's explanation.

Answer (B)
_________________

I marked Option E because if filmgoers are drawn to a variety of films it will strengthen the fact that the film was competing with several other films and hence the audience was scattered and number of viewers were probably small
VeritasKarishma Mam can you please explain where am I going wrong in my pre thinking ?
Also Kindly explain How Option B is correct as rest of the options I am able to eliminate

Conclusion: Competetion from several other films of same type (not -ve reviews) -> Low filmgoers for author's film
C->E
As it is strengthen we need to show that cause leads to effect.
Presumptin: What if even though several films of same type released in a weekened filmgoers watch all films then author's argument is weqakened.
The same is being done by B.

I got B & E which are near to conclusion but on negation B definitely weakens where as E does not.

tejyr I differ with your reasoning here. It is a strengthener type of question. How can a negation technique be used for arriving at the answer in strengthener type of questions?

Hey, I would like to help you with this one.

Consider the conclusion assuming yourself to be the director - my film is not gathering enough audience because my limited set of audience is diverted to other similar movies. But let's say a guy comes up and say - hey, but the people can watch your film also. It is not compulsory that they watch only one film in a week.

Hope this helps. Consider kudos if that helps.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

the argument says that the number of viewers who watch the genre of film made by the director is relatively small, and the option E says that most of the filmgoers are drawn to a variety of kinds of film. But how do we know that the this small number of people who watch the genre made by director fall into the category of most filmgoers or not.

MY main confusion is relatively small could be <10% of total film goers and most> 50% uptill 100% so how do we determine that that this group of relatively small people does not fall under the group "most of filmgoers".

According to the film's director, it was not the negative reviews that made filmgoers stay away from the film, rather the film had a small audience and many films targeting the same audience were released the same weekend.
Now, since we need to Strengthen the director's explanation, we need to find an option which actually supports the fact that less viewers was the cause of the film not doing so great.

(A) The film director's film received no positive reviews.
This is not supporting the director's explanation, rather its weakening it at some level.

(B) Filmgoers seldom see more than one film in a weekend.
Now this makes sense. If filmgoer's rarely watch more than 1 film in a weekend, then this might be reason that the movie did not do that great. Since, we have already been told that the audience for this film is limited. Hence, B is the correct answer.

(C) The total number of filmgoers was larger than average on the weekend the film director's film opened.
This is weakening the director's claim. If the total number of filmgoer's was larger than average then it must have been other factor's for the films failure.

(D) Each of the other films that the film director alludes to receive one or two positive reviews.
This is irrelevant to the director's claims.

(E) Most filmgoers are drawn to a variety of kinds of film.
Even if filmgoers are drawn to a variety of films, we are told that the specific film has a very small audience. So this does not affect the director's argument.

I hope in this questions as per general context language (in which directly as per argument objects being used) especially for b,e i hope whether it is assumption or strengthner we can use negation.
Experts pls clarify once regarding negation in strengthner questions

Posted from my mobile device

VeritasKarishma Mam thanks for the explanation
Also I subsequently noticed one thing in Option E that it is already stated in the passage that filmgoers who prefer same type of movie are drawn to different types of films of same genre. The same is explicitly mentioned in the stimulus itself . So this Option Choice is somewhat already stated. Hence it is an inference.
Am I correct mam?

No, option (E) is not already mentioned in the argument.

The argument says "it was competing with several other films that appeal to the same type of filmgoer that mine does"
whereas option (E) says "Most filmgoers are drawn to a variety of kinds of film."

The "several other films" mentioned in the argument could be of the same kind. They needn't be of very different kinds. Anyway, the group of viewers that the director is talking about is a small group. He says "the number of such viewers is relatively small".
Option (E) talks about "most filmgoers".
_________________

Film director: It's inaccurate to say that filmgoers stayed away from my film because it received one or two negative reviews. My film had such a small audience during its opening weekend simply because it was competing with several other films that appeal to the same type of filmgoer that mine does, and the number of such viewers is relatively small.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to support the film director's explanation?

(A) The film director's film received no positive reviews. - WRONG. Whether it received positive reviews or not, it is irrelevant. However, this choice only weakens if at all considered, even after director avoids the parameter of reviews.
(B) Filmgoers seldom see more than one film in a weekend. - CORRECT. If first weekend people went mostly for other films then his/her statement is justified.
(C) The total number of filmgoers was larger than average on the weekend the film director's film opened. - WRONG. Even with larger audience the director's film is ignored. This means director's reasoning is weakened.
(D) Each of the other films that the film director alludes to receive one or two positive reviews. - WRONG. This is irrelevant.
(E) Most filmgoers are drawn to a variety of kinds of film. - WRONG. Again this is covered in the passage that same genre of films were competing.

Answer B.
_________________