Logical Reasoning

PT146 · S3 · Q26 Film director: Although the production

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Film director: Although the production costs of my latest film are very high, there is little risk that the film studio will not recover these costs.

Conclusion

The film studio will make its money back despite high production costs.

Evidence

A significant portion of the film's budget is dedicated to developing special effects technology, which can be utilized in future films, reducing the risk of financial loss.

Evaluate

The author seems to be saying,

So the author is envisioning that these FX we invent for this film save us money later (the studio pays less than they would to make a future film) or make us money later (some other studio pays us to use our FX technology).

Goal

Identify an answer choice that raises doubts about the studio's ability to make its money back by exploiting the special effects technology, either by questioning the future utility or marketability of this FX technology.

26.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

  1. Because the film studio owns

    Opposite (Strengthens)

    This choice says the studio will control the use of the special effects in future films, potentially allowing them to sell rights and make money back, thus reinforcing the author's argument.

    1% picked this

  2. Films that introduce innovative special-effects

    Opposite (Strengthens)

    This suggests films with new special effects tend to have large audiences, indicating the innovation might attract viewers, aiding in cost recovery.

    2% picked this

  3. The production costs of this

    Weaker Impact

    This posits that high production costs mean even popularity won’t allow ticket sales to recoup costs. While it's a valid concern, it misses the author's main point that future financial recovery hinges on technology use, not immediate box office success. The author is already acknowledging that the movie itself won't be enough to recoup costs, so we're not really hurting her argument by reminding her of that possibility.

    8% picked this

  4. Correct

    In the past, many innovative

    Why this is right

    This indicates that technology developed for films that flop is often abandoned because it becomes undesirable. It directly challenges the assumption that the special effects technology will have value and provides a plausible reason for why the studio might not make its money back if the film is unpopular.

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

    88% picked this

  5. The use of the new

    Opposite (Strengthens)

    This states that using the new technology will lower production costs for other films, which supports the author's claim that the technology will eventually recoup the expenses by saving money in the long run.

    2% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free