Woody Allen

Answer choices

1. A

   Out of Scope: artistic merit29% picked this

   Critics should consider not only an individual film in isolation, but also its relation to the filmmaker's entire body of work, when attempting

   This author was pretty neutral in describing Woody's motif. She never indicated she thought it was insightful, new, tiresome, etc. So her argument didn't involve any principle of "how you judge a film's merit".

   29%
2. B

   Unclear Impact1% picked this

   People who are not themselves artists should not presume to interpret films that take as their

   Is our author herself an artist? We have no idea. If she isn't, then this answer would say that she shouldn't even have written this passage.

   1%
3. C

   Correct66% picked this

   The fate that a character in a movie meets can give an indication of the filmmaker's views concerning his approval

   Why this is right

   This is very mildly phrased, so it's easy to agree with. It certainly isn't a principle underlying the bulk of the passage, but it sort of explains how the last paragraph relates to the previous three paragraphs. The author is building a case that a motif throughout Allen's films was to mock snobby artist types. The author tries to further illustrate that main contention by showing us that Allen doesn't mock nonartistic types. The evidence for that is that the nonartistic characters tend to have happier outcomes (the fate that character meets in the movie). The beginning of the last paragraph is saying, "It is also significant that in Allen's films, the less artistic the characters, the more likely their narrative is to result in a happy ending." Is that also significant? It only relates to what we've been talking about so far if "the likelihood of resulting in a happier outcome is indicative of the filmmaker's approval / disapproval of that character".

   Skill tested: Principle · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

   66%
4. D

   Out of Scope: writer of screenplay3% picked this

   The writer of a film's screenplay should be considered only one of many contributors to the ultimate

   I don't know how this answer was pretending to be relevant, other than the outside knowledge trap for people who know that Woody Allen usually writes and directs his films (but that's never said in the passage). Our author is never talking about who wrote the screenplay vs. other contributors to a film. The only contributor we talk about is Woody Allen.

   3%
5. E

   Out of Scope1% picked this

   Prior work of a film's cast members should be taken into account when assessing the artistic

   Out of Scope: cast members' prior work This passage never talks about what other roles the actors in Woody Allen movies had portrayed before they appeared in a Woody Allen film.

   1%