The worst-case scenario is to be rigid and inflexible approaching a TC complex like this.
Your focus should be on the question rather on the words. They are a natural consequence of your sentence understanding
Now, notice that this sentence is complex: it uses eh-dash, colon and a linking words BUT as contrast. So we should have the (i) in contrast with the other two blanks
There is no point in combing through the director’s work for hints of ideological significance.
MMMhhh this phrase (it is not a sentence) is here to introduce something about the director's work. Basically it syass that the job is meaningless
It is unnecessary: his ideology—Marxist, anti-imperialist, aligned with the perceived interests of the powerless and the marginal—is the (i) ________ of his films.
We do not need and then a colo, which means that the sentence after the colon is an explanation WHY the all things are unnecessary. The ideology - my thinking or what I firmly believe, related to the Marxism philosophy, is the main focus of the movie. But for now I leave it to see what is going on in the rest of the sentence.
One thing is sure: the first blank is in contrast with the other two blanks. I.e. IF the first one is white the other blanks must be black or the other way aroundThe clarity and force of that ideology are considerable, but its (ii) ________ sometimes bothers critics, who often scold the director for lacking (iii) ________.The ideology is powerful
BUT the way it is exposed in the movie or maybe how it is intended DO NOT like the critics
The same critics OFTEN reproach the director to have or to lack of something.
Now , doing reverse engineering of the sentence
1) the director lacks of something good and because we are talking about IDEOLOGY or ideas and BECAUSE the critics do not like the ideas are they are exposed or filmed in the movie the (iii) must be courage. We said that the ideology is powerful soooo the director lacks of courage or a strong way to expose his idea or ideology
2) going backward: the director lacks courage. That means THIS bothers the critics. And IF this is not good to the critics the arguments exposed in the movie are WEAK. BECAUSE the ideology per see is strong and powerful. The only words
is bluntness. During the sentence, we are talking about ideology, powerfulness, ideas and that those are weak or strong NOT unclear. So D and F are out
3) Now we are in the last blank to fill in which turns out is the first one. The (i) blank must be on the other side of the spectrum of the (ii) and (iii) blanks
we said that the movie shows what Marxism is indeed: it stand on the side or powerless people. the poor....and blah blah blah. The movie shows this. Notice also that A and C are basically to options similar: hidden and murky means basically NO clearness. Obscure. So they cannot be the answers for two reasons
- if they were then we would have TWO good words for the first blank. This is clearly NOT possible. The answer must be B
- moreover, we need a word that shows the director's ideas are good. Murky and hidden are NOT good. For example: murky waters are NOT clear waters and they are cloudy, dirty. This is completely out of scope for the first blank.
B must be the first blank
Sorry for the long explanation.
I hope this helps
_________________