The French minister of culture has announced that France will not restrict American movies. Assuming that film critics are right in questioning the overall quality of American movies, it follows that (French movie theaters will soon feature movies of questionable quality)
The phrase in parentheses is it a premise or conclusion? My answer I put that it was a premise.
2nd question: (The Cubans are planning to boycott the conference), so the Venezuelans will boycott it, too. My answer was a conclusion
I agree with both your answers.
Based on the given information, your answers seem correct.
In the first statement, "(French movie theaters will soon feature movies of questionable quality)" is a premise. It is presented as an assumption derived from the previous statement that American movies have been criticized for their overall quality. The statement is providing additional information based on that premise.
In the second statement, "(The Cubans are planning to boycott the conference), so the Venezuelans will boycott it, too," is indeed a conclusion. The statement is making a logical inference that if the Cubans are planning to boycott the conference, it can be concluded that the Venezuelans will do the same. It is drawing a relationship between the actions of the Cubans and the anticipated actions of the Venezuelans.