NEW HERE? LEARN MORE
closeclose
Last visit was: 25 Apr 2024, 06:53 It is currently 25 Apr 2024, 06:53
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
New posts
New comers' posts

Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel

Sartore is a better movie reviewer than Kelly. A movie review should h

SORT BY:
Date
Kudos
Tags:
Find Similar Topics 
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
D
AshutoshB
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Dec 2017
Posts: 325
Own Kudos [?]: 1663 [10]
Given Kudos: 348
GMAT 1: 650 Q50 V28
GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V40
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Sartore is a better movie reviewer than Kelly. A movie review should h [#permalink] New post   18 Sep 2018, 01:07
3
Kudos
7
Bookmarks
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

45% (medium)

Question Stats:

65% (01:53) correct 35% (01:58) wrong based on 692 sessions
Hide Show timer Statistics
Sartore is a better movie reviewer than Kelly. A movie review should help readers determine whether or not they are apt to enjoy the movie, and a person who is likely to enjoy a particular movie is much more likely to realize this by reading a review by Sartore than a review by Kelly, even though Sartore is more likely to give a movie an unfavorable review than a favorable one.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

(A) Sartore has technical knowledge of film, whereas Kelly is merely a fan.

(B) Most of Kelly's movie reviews are unfavorable to the movie being reviewed.

(C) One who is apt not to enjoy a particular movie is more likely to realize this by reading a review by Sartore than a review by Kelly.

(D) Reading a movie review by Sartore will usually help one to enjoy the movie more than one otherwise would have.

(E) Most of the movies that Sartore reviews are also reviewed by Kelly.

LSAT 78
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
C
avatar
B
rajamech
Intern
Intern
Joined: 06 Feb 2017
Posts: 31
Own Kudos [?]: 25 [2]
Given Kudos: 5
Location: India
Schools: HBS '22 HEC '22
GMAT 1: 570 Q39 V28
GMAT 2: 620 Q49 V26
GPA: 4
Send PM
Re: Sartore is a better movie reviewer than Kelly. A movie review should h [#permalink] New post   18 Sep 2018, 02:05
2
Kudos
Official answer on Manhatten Prep:
Correct Answer:
C

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) Out of scope. The argument doesn't care about technical knowledge; just whether a person can help people know if they'd enjoy a movie. If you equated technical knowledge with an ability to inform people, you made an unwarranted jump.

(B) If anything, this answer tells me that Kelly and Sartore are similar in some way. That doesn't help me determine that Sartore is better.

(C) Bingo. Almost exactly what we predicted. We needed to support Sartore's better skills with an answer comparing the two reviewers and stating that S beats K. This does that for a new group, strengthening our conclusion.

(D) Out of scope. "Good reviews" are defined in the argument as helping people determine whether they would like a film, not altering whether or not they'd enjoy the movie.

(E) Out of scope. The amount of overlap between the movies they review doesn't impact how good they are at reviewing movies. Also, if anything, this draws a similarity between the two, when I'm trying to conclude that they're different.
User avatar
S
ArjunJag1328
Manager
Manager
Joined: 24 Dec 2017
Posts: 142
Own Kudos [?]: 65 [0]
Given Kudos: 48
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Real Estate
Schools: Johnson '21
Send PM
Re: Sartore is a better movie reviewer than Kelly. A movie review should h [#permalink] New post   18 Sep 2018, 03:11
Sartore is a better movie reviewer than Kelly. A movie review should help readers determine whether or not they are apt to enjoy the movie, and a person who is likely to enjoy a particular movie is much more likely to realize this by reading a review by Sartore than a review by Kelly, even though Sartore is more likely to give a movie an unfavorable review than a favorable one.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

(A) Sartore has technical knowledge of film, whereas Kelly is merely a fan.
Explanation: IRRELEVANT

(B) Most of Kelly's movie reviews are unfavorable to the movie being reviewed.
Explanation: Most are Favourable and rest are unfavourable. How does this option help us to determine whether Sartore is a better reviewer? - IRRELEVANT

(C) One who is apt not to enjoy a particular movie is more likely to realize this by reading a review by Sartore than a review by Kelly.
Explanation: There we go! This option implies that Sartore reviews are legit and people choose this platform to read genuine feedbacks. Hence it indirectly claims that Sartre is better off than Kelly. -CORRECT

(D) Reading a movie review by Sartore will usually help one to enjoy the movie more than one otherwise would have.
Explanation: Sartore only gives legitimate reviews but it doesn't change a person's approach towards a movie just because of the review - INCORRECT

(E) Most of the movies that Sartore reviews are also reviewed by Kelly.
Explanation: So what? - INCORRECT

HENCE I chose C

Thank you
Arjun
User avatar
L
mSKR
VP
VP
Joined: 14 Aug 2019
Posts: 1378
Own Kudos [?]: 846 [0]
Given Kudos: 381
Location: Hong Kong
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GPA: 3.81
Send PM
Re: Sartore is a better movie reviewer than Kelly. A movie review should h [#permalink] New post   20 Feb 2021, 19:51
+ve review of 40% movies: Efficiency higher for S : Most people like movies as S reviewed compared to what K reviewed
Negative review of 60% movies: Efficiency higher for K: Most people unlike movies as S reviewed compared to what K reviewed

Conclusion: Sartore is a better movie reviewer than Kelly.
Which following options give most claim that yes, S is a better reviewer than K.

Quote:
(A) Sartore has technical knowledge of film, whereas Kelly is merely a fan.

Irrelevant Information: It shows no relation with why S efficiency is higher than K . It maybe possible than fan review is more close to audience. It maybe equally possible than a person with technical knowledge can review better.

Quote:
(B) Most of Kelly's movie reviews are unfavorable to the movie being reviewed.

Irrelevant information: It doesn’t give any comparison with review of S.
It may be possible than K total number is smaller than total S. – strengthens the claim
It maybe equally possible that K review movie much higher than S that total number of K matching with audience is much higher than S- weakens the claim

Quote:
(C) One who is apt not to enjoy a particular movie is more likely to realize this by reading a review by Sartore than a review by Kelly.

Seems correct: Efficiency of sarote is higher with a reference , S reference helps t strengthen that S is better than K

Quote:
(D) Reading a movie review by Sartore will usually help one to enjoy the movie more than one otherwise would have.

We don’t care how much it would help to enjoy movie. We care more about the number of people can like the movie as predicted by S.

Quote:
(E) Most of the movies that Sartore reviews are also reviewed by Kelly.

Irrelevant information: But I can’t figure out any relation between efficiency of each reviewer. Neither any information is given about a common movie that both reviewed and results were good for S or K
User avatar
G
CEdward
VP
VP
Joined: 11 Aug 2020
Posts: 1262
Own Kudos [?]: 201 [0]
Given Kudos: 332
Send PM
Re: Sartore is a better movie reviewer than Kelly. A movie review should h [#permalink] New post   21 Feb 2021, 15:18
Can someone explain C? In my view, it was simply a restatement of what we already know from the passage...A on the other hand tells us that Sartore's reviews, despite being unfavorable from time to time, is valid because he has the credentials...
User avatar
B
Sri786
Intern
Intern
Joined: 02 Jul 2016
Posts: 16
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [0]
Given Kudos: 58
Send PM
Re: Sartore is a better movie reviewer than Kelly. A movie review should h [#permalink] New post   23 May 2021, 05:34
Argument here is: "A movie review should help readers determine whether or not they are apt to enjoy the movie"

Conclusion here is: "a person who is likely to enjoy a particular movie is much more likely to realize this by reading a review by Sartore than a review by Kelly"

Option C is a repetition of an already given conclusion while the Option A will provide more strength to the argument.

I believe Option A is best answer among the given choices. Please clarify?
User avatar
L
unraveled
CEO
CEO
Joined: 07 Mar 2019
Posts: 2553
Own Kudos [?]: 1813 [1]
Given Kudos: 763
Location: India
WE:Sales (Energy and Utilities)
Send PM
Re: Sartore is a better movie reviewer than Kelly. A movie review should h [#permalink] New post   26 May 2021, 09:48
1
Kudos
Sri786 wrote:
Argument here is: "A movie review should help readers determine whether or not they are apt to enjoy the movie"

Conclusion here is: "a person who is likely to enjoy a particular movie is much more likely to realize this by reading a review by Sartore than a review by Kelly"

Option C is a repetition of an already given conclusion while the Option A will provide more strength to the argument.

I believe Option A is best answer among the given choices. Please clarify?

Sri786
The part you are saying is a conclusion is actually a sub-conclusion. See the logical flow of argument below:
A movie review should help readers determine whether or not they are apt to enjoy the movie, ------> and a person who is likely to enjoy a particular movie is much more likely to realize this by reading a review by Sartore than a review by Kelly (even though Sartore is more likely to give a movie an unfavorable review than a favorable one - this is stated to reinforce the case in point to lead to the conclusion) -----> That's why - Sartore is a better movie reviewer than Kelly.

Hence we need to find why Sartore is better movie reviewer OR how Sartore's skill is better?
C basically says that a review that helps people make a firm decision is better.

HTH.
User avatar
B
AbhishekDhanraJ72
Manager
Manager
Joined: 15 Apr 2020
Posts: 185
Own Kudos [?]: 18 [0]
Given Kudos: 2218
GMAT 1: 620 Q45 V30
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Re: Sartore is a better movie reviewer than Kelly. A movie review should h [#permalink] New post   24 Nov 2022, 23:25
I feel D is weakening to the argument. Can someone confirm this?

Posted from my mobile device
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
Re: Sartore is a better movie reviewer than Kelly. A movie review should h [#permalink]
24 Nov 2022, 23:25
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6920 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
mysterymanrog
CR Forum Moderator
832 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne
Main navigation
GMAT Resources
Partners
MBA Resources
www.gmac.com|www.mba.com | | GMAT Club Rules | Terms and Conditions