Q6 - The criticism of the popular film comedy ~

[ahn2014]

I picked (C) because the reason of not being problematic is that it is funny.

I eliminated (D) because the reason is not the success of comedy.


Can anybody explain why I am wrong?

Thank you

[rinagoldfield]

Hi ahn2014 , thanks for your post.

It sounds to me like you are caught up inside the premises. On “principle -- justify the reasoning” questions, we need an answer choice that fully links the premises to the conclusion.

The first step is identifying the argument core:

P1: The stylized characters result in a funny film
P2: Funniness is the most important thing in a comedy
C: The criticisms of the stylized characters are misguided

The author assumes that any comedy that achieves funniness needn’t be criticized, since funniness is the most important aspect of comedy.

(D) takes this assumption and broadens it. This answer choice describes the umbrella category of “genre,” into which “comedy” snugly fits.

(C) concerns how comedies find their funny, while the author is concerned that comedies find their funny.

(A) is contradicted. The author doesn’t care that the movie is unrealistic.

(B) is out of scope. Popular?

(E) is unsupported. The author is not concerned with narrowness within a genre, but rather how a genre defines success.

[ferlisi]

I'm still confused by this question. Why is (B) wrong? We are told that this film is popular. (B) says that "films are successful as long as they are popular." So wouldn't that mean that, because this film is popular, it is successful? Isn't that essentially what we get out of (D) - that it is successful??

[Olivia James]

Hello -

I hope that this is still of relevance to you.

The stimulus tells us that the criticism for not being realistic is misguided not because it is "popular" but because it succeeds in being funny, which essentially is the important thing or essence of a comedy.
In fact, if you would omit the word popular from the argument it would not impact the the entire question in the least - it is an adjective that does not do anything for your argument.

Hope this helps -

[ganbayou]

I am still not sure about C...in the arg it does not say "successful" or about succeeding. in the arg it implies the show was funny and that's the important thing, but important thing is not the same as success right?
(A lot of shows are funny but not nec. succeed...)

[maryadkins]

I think you mean you aren't sure about (D).

I agree with you. There's a term shift here between funniness being "important" and funniness making it successful. I think the real answer is that (D) is the best of the five choices.

[jm.kahn]

I think C can be seen as justifying the conclusion that criticism due to stylistic portrayal is misguided.

C says that comedies should find their humor in stylistic portrayals, and we know from the premises that humor is important for comedy. So stylistic portrayals are very relevant and important for the comedy film Quirks, because that is where comedy is expected to find humor. Thus, criticizing Quirks for being non-realistic is wrong.

C seems to be better than D.

Why is C worse than D? D I thought can not be seen as justifying the conclusion because though it says the film is successful, it doesn't mean that criticism of the film for not being realistic is not valid. A film could be successful and still deserving of criticism for not being realistic. D in no way seems to counter the argument's conclusion that the criticism of film for not being realistic is wrong.

[Jahma002]

The argument: criticism is invalid, because the movie is funny and it's the important thing in comedy.

So, the conclusion and premise are not connected. Funny movie means you can't criticise it?

D says as long as it's a successful comedy then it is successful in General.

Like cooking a dish. If a dish is a great desert then it is well made. You can't say it's too sweet, too crunchy, too salty.

[Jahma002]

Oh, and forgot to add, C does not justify the author's argument as a whole, it just adds support. Remember, you aren't adding support but justifying the argument of the author.

[vstoever]

Oh, and forgot to add, C does not justify the author's argument as a whole, it just adds support. Remember, you aren't adding support but justifying the argument of the author.

Although this is a strengthen question: MOST helps to justify is a strengthen question stem.

But D strengthens more than C because if the film is successful, it is more probable that the criticism is misguided

[LolaC289]

All of the 4 answer choices look off to me. Since the conclusion is the "not being realistic" criticism is misguided, shouldn't we support this by saying that this movie is in fact, realistic? To me the correct answer should be something states "as long as a film is funny it is realistic". However, none of the answer choices has anything to do with being realistic or not.