stoy4o
Rightly considered the epitome of Renaissance art and still inspiring awe, the Sistine Chapel ceiling features more than 300 figures that
took Michelangelo more than four years to paint them and extensively restored over the past 30 years.
(A) took Michelangelo more than four years to paint them and
(B) took Michelangelo more than four years to paint and
(C) took Michelangelo more than four years to paint and have been
(D) took Michelangelo more than four years to paint it and has been
(E) to paint it took Michelangelo more than four years and
Source: Optimus-prep
Dear
stoy4o,
I'm happy to respond.

My friend, this is a low-quality SC practice question. Just because some company out there says, in their marketing literature, that they have high quality questions, don't automatically believe that everything said for marketing purposes is true. Be discerning as a consumer of practice questions.
Why do I say this is low quality? Because it has two acceptable answers.
Choices (A) & (E) are both wrong because of the double-pronoun awkwardness.
Choice (B) is wrong because the verb "
restore" is not an active verb with Michelangelo as the subject. You don't need to have a detailed knowledge of Renaissance art, but you should have the general idea that
Michelangelo was not around during the past 30 years.
This leaves us with a choice of (C) vs. (D). Exactly what was restored? If we say that the 300+ figures were restored, then we would have the parallelism:
...the Sistine Chapel ceiling features more than 300 figures that
//took Michelangelo more than four years to paint
and
//have been extensively restored over the past 30 years. This is what choice (C) has.
By contrast, if we say that the ceiling as a whole was restored, then that entirely changes the parallelism. We would have two verbs in parallel:
...the Sistine Chapel ceiling
//features more than 300 figures that took Michelangelo more than four years to paint it
and
//has been extensively restored over the past 30 years.This is what choice (D) has.
Each one is grammatically correct, depending on which one we think has been restored. The prompt is ungrammatical enough that we can't use this to decide. We would need outside knowledge about the situation--- but of course, that is never needed to answer a truly GMAT-worthy question. Without outside knowledge, this question has two viable answers.
Furthermore, having the adverb "extensively" interrupt the verb, that is, come between the auxiliary verb and the main verb, is slightly awkward, not something one typically sees on the GMAT. The GMAT tends to be more well-spoken that this.
Overall, this is a poor question. Don't spend a great deal of time puzzling over poor questions, because it will not help you. Here's a high quality SC practice question:
https://gmat.magoosh.com/questions/3597Does all this make sense?
Mike