Question

what does the reviewer like about this film?
as far as i’m concerned, if you’ve seen one gnome/elf/sprite, you’ve seen ‘em all. but, even though “lord of the rings: the fellowship of the ring” is (5) stuffed with pixies, i found it hobbit - forming.
that’s because this is not at all a cutesy movie. oh, a couple of backgrounds in hobbit world are as pretty (10) and light - filled as a thomas kinkade enchanted cottage, but writer/director peter jackson’s muscular, dangerous movie knows that good is only possible in a world where evil looks like a delicious (15) alternative.
“the lord of the rings” is, like “harry potter,” an adaptation of a beloved novel but, unlike “potter,” “rings” messes with it. for “rings,” the key is not slavishly (20) recreating every incident of a cherished book, but finding a way to capture its essence, so the movie can be loved by fans and newcomers alike. jackson leaves huge portions of “rings” on the elf shelf (he had to; at three hours, it still has (25) one momentous battle too many), but he preserves its magical, heart - fueled sense of adventure. the result is not just a faithful transcription of a classic, but a (30) wondrous reimagining of one.
a big part of the “rings” magic is its light touch with special effects. there probably isn’t a scene here that doesn’t have them, but “rings” doesn’t feel like an (35) effects movie, where each empty image is meant to top images we’ve seen before, whether or not they add to the narrative. the effects in “rings,” such as some (40) thrilling rapids that assume the shape of galloping horses or some giant statues that make mount rushmore look like bobbleheads, nurture our imaginations instead of trying to replace them.
chris hewitt, “it’s hobbit - forming”

1. what is meant by “jackson leaves huge portions of ‘rings’ on the elf shelf.” (lines 23 - 25)?

(1) he includes too much about elves.
(2) he downplays special effects.
(3) he didn’t follow the plot of the book.
(4) he left certain parts out of the film.
(5) he shortened the length of the film.

1. which of the following might cause this reviewer to react more negatively to the film?

(1) if more adorable elves were included
(2) if the evil parts were more appealing
(3) if the scenery used more fantasy
(4) if the plot was more like the book
(5) if the movie were shorter

Explanation:

Question 19

To answer this, we analyze the relevant text: "Jackson leaves huge portions of 'Rings' on the elf shelf (he had to; at three hours, it still has one momentous battle too many), but he preserves its magical, heart - fueled sense of adventure." The phrase "leaves huge portions... on the elf shelf" implies that Jackson did not include those portions in the film.

• Option (1): The text doesn't suggest he included too much about elves. Eliminate.
• Option (2): The text is about excluding parts, not downplaying special effects. Eliminate.
• Option (3): The text says he didn't slavishly recreate every incident, but it's about excluding parts, not not following the plot. Eliminate.
• Option (4): "Leaves huge portions... on the elf shelf" means he left certain parts out of the film. This matches.
• Option (5): The text says the film is three hours and has one battle too many, not that he shortened the length. Eliminate.

We analyze the reviewer's likes and dislikes from the text:

• The reviewer likes that the film is not cutesy and that evil looks like a delicious alternative (so making evil more appealing would not be a negative).
• The reviewer likes the balance of special effects and narrative, and the fact that the film captures the essence rather than slavishly following the book.
• The reviewer also likes that the film is not stuffed with too many cutesy creatures (like gnomes/elves/sprites).

Now let's analyze the options:

• Option (1): The reviewer says "if you've seen one gnome/elf/sprite, you've seen 'em all" and the film is not cutesy. So including more adorable elves (which are cutesy) would likely make the reviewer react more negatively.
• Option (2): The reviewer says good is only possible in a world where evil looks like a delicious alternative, so making evil more appealing would not be negative. Eliminate.
• Option (3): The text has some pretty backgrounds, and the reviewer doesn't seem to dislike fantasy scenery. Eliminate.
• Option (4): The reviewer likes that the film captures the essence rather than following the book slavishly, so making the plot more like the book may not be negative. Eliminate.
• Option (5): The text says the film is three hours and has one battle too many, but there's no indication that a shorter film would be disliked. Eliminate.

Answer:

(4) He left certain parts out of the film.

Question 20