Unlike everyone else, the Virus game didn't bother me nearly as much as the second game. I wasted way to much time on that game
Lol Laquer. That wasn't a fun reading passage but I don't think the questions were particularly hard.
Had three LR. Tw…
I'll take a shot at it. My interpretation of B is that while it may or may not describe Tim's argument (since his grandfather could be unknown information), the fact that he is challenging the opinion with something unknown doesn't make his argument…
A: By itself, it doesn't. But it does if the criteria which determines its level of success is not the one being criticized.
In this case, answer D gives us a criteria.
It's not just that the film is successful. A film's success can be measure…
I'll try one last time.
It doesn't matter that you think D is flawed. What matters is that it actually supports the conclusion. You can clearly see that it does.
C isn't reasonable because it doesn't support the conclusion. In order to support the…
....Maybe that's why you got the question wrong?
Hey, I'm trying to help you understand this question. Don't criticize my logic when yours led you to the wrong answer. The LSAT is heavily scrutinized and bad questions are removed. You didn't find a…
You are missing that the fact that a stylistic portrayal isn't binary. It's not on or off. One film can be more stylized than the next. Here they are saying that the characters are too stylized. The critics weren't complaining about the fact that an…
But C doesn't make it so it's not an issue at all.
Simply,
Suggesting that comedies should find humor in stylistic portrayals doesn't help or hurt the argument. Even if a stylistic portrayal is necessary, a critic can still say that a film is too…
The stimulus is basically saying that the only thing about the comedy that's relevant is that the film is funny. It's saying that criticizing the film for being too stylized is missing the point.
C. The critic is not arguing that the comedy needs …