Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT146 S3 Q26 Explanation

Film director: Although the production

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

TopicsWeaken

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • 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

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

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. Even if the film is unpopular, much of the money is that could be used in future films.

What this question is testing

Weaken

Your task

Find the choice that makes the argument's conclusion less likely to be true.

Common trap

Answers that look negative but attack a claim the argument never relied on.

Winning move

Find the assumption the argument depends on, then pick the choice that undermines it.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
26.

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

Answer choices

  1. Opposite (Strengthens)1% picked this

    Because the film studio owns the new technology, the studio will be able to control its use

    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.

  2. Opposite (Strengthens)2% picked this

    Films that introduce innovative special-effects technologies generally draw large audiences of people who are curious

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

  3. Weaker Impact8% picked this

    The production costs of this film are so high that, even if the film is popular, it is unlikely that the film’s

    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.

  4. Correct87% picked this

    In the past, many innovative special-effects technologies were abandoned after the films for which they were developed

    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.

  5. Opposite (Strengthens)2% picked this

    The use of the new special-effects technology would lower the production costs of other films

    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.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

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