MovieChat Forums > Idiotest (2014) Discussion > The Material

The Material

posted 10 years ago by bing-57
11 replies | jump to latest

It seems to me like the writers should run out of material pretty quick. Probably about a third of the puzzles I've seen so far are classic brain teasers that have floated around the joke books and the internet for years. And the rest all rely on spelling anomalies (such as "Point to the greenhouse, not the green house."). There's only so many of them to go around.

Also, the players on the early shows won't understand that they are being fed trick questions only and the trick is to NEVER go with your first instinct. Once they get players on the show that have already seen episodes on TV, the number of people tricked will go way down.

And, I have my overall doubts about the concept of the show. Most people do well in their lives going with their first instinct. This program penalizes quick thinkers.

--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?

[–] damienoujia 10 years ago

My problem with the show is it struck me as too easy. The greenhouse one, for example...I saw the glass green house instantly when I looked at the picture. It stuck out like a sore thumb because there was nothing else like it around.

I find it so easy I get frustrated when people get things wrong. At least those women picked one of the green houses, they got a pass. When that other idiot on the other team picked a spider for candy and paint cans for mixed up words, that's when I lost it. At least fail by making a fair try. That woman was a moron. She was penalized. If she was a quick thinker, then we are all in trouble.

[–] bing-57 10 years ago

> My problem with the show is it struck me as too easy.

Well, it is incredibly easy when you are sitting at home on your couch and you don't have a ten-second timer clicking away.

Consider the contestants we've seen so far. They don't know that these are trick questions. You and I, at home, have figured that out. The player is shown a picture and has ten seconds to answer.

In that ten seconds, they must,

1. Read the question
2. Think about what the question wants
3. Look at the screen and identify the objects
4. Consider that this a trick question, so the first thing you thought was right is wrong.
5. Figure out what the trick is
6. Pick a new answer

And you lose $100 per second that it takes you.

--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?

[–] Redhawkof2008 10 years ago

My problem with the show is that there's not too much to it. The whole format is just looking at pictures and trying to answer quickly. Even the final part is like this. They need to spice it up.

Son, you got a panty on your head.

[–] Foxbarking 10 years ago

Well even more, a lot of the questions are not good questions. A few examples:

There is a picture with fruit and signs and the instructions are: Find the orange. When they couldn't, he showed the answer was an orange sign. This is not accurate because they did not say "find something orange." Find the orange is only grammatically correct if the orange is a noun and thus their answer is incorrect.

This is followed by a question where the host gives the definition of "year" as the orbital period of any planet. That also is inaccurate. "Year" is clearly defined as the orbital period of Earth.

Then, they show 4 football players and ask which player has the most RBIs. The answer is a guy with the name "Orbison." However, you cannot use the term "most" to refer to any list or group of less than three. So since there was solely one R one B and one I in his name, the question is faulty.

It's one thing to have trick questions, it's another to completely lie and mislead people.

[–] bing-57 10 years ago

> This is followed by a question where the host gives the definition of "year" as the orbital period of any planet. That also is inaccurate. "Year" is clearly defined as the orbital period of Earth.

The question referred to a "Jupiter year". The host shortened it during his explanation to say just "year." The question was worded correctly.

> However, you cannot use the term "most" to refer to any list or group of less than three.

Sure you can. Read any definition and it says, "greatest in quantity, extent, or degree."

> So since there was solely one R one B and one I in his name, the question is faulty.

Orbison's first name also had an "rbi" in it. He did have two and all the others had none.

> It's one thing to have trick questions, it's another to completely lie and mislead people.

A trick question is supposed to be misleading. That's the fun of it.

--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?

[–] Foxbarking 10 years ago

The question referred to a "Jupiter year". The host shortened it during his explanation to say just "year." The question was worded correctly.

I'll admit that one. I caught it just at the end and didn't hear the Jupiter part. That is definitely my mistake.

> However, you cannot use the term "most" to refer to any list or group of less than three.

Sure you can. Read any definition and it says, "greatest in quantity, extent, or degree."

Um, that definition doesn't support what you claim, it actually supports what I claim. It gives the definition of "most" by using a superlative. Something cannot have the "most" property unless three or more subjects being compared have that property. "Greatest" is also superlative, which means something cannot have the greatest quantity unless three or more subjects are being prepared. Hence your definition of "most" verifies what I originally mentioned. "Most" is the superlative form of "much" or "many." "Greatest" is the superlative form of "good." Superlative form can only be used to discuss property in three or more subjects. So for something to be "greatest in quantity, extent or degree," it would have to be a property existing in three or more subjects. Regardless, the definition is simply a definition and not a grammar rule, so I'll explain the grammar rule and why my position is correct.

"More" is the comparative form of the words "much" and "many." Comparative form is used when you are observing two objects and describing which one has the greater amount of the property being discussed. "Most" is the superlative form of "much" or "many." Superlative form takes into account that you are not comparing simply two things, but you are instead taking a property that exists in each of the subjects and describing which one has the greatest amount of that property. To do this, two things are necessary. You must be discussing the property of three or more objects and each object has to include some amount of the property.

For example, if I have three students in gym class, Bill and Joe are sitting on the bleachers and Bob is running, it would be completely inaccurate grammatically for me to say "Bob is running the fastest of the three boys." You can't use superlative form when describing a property that doesn't exist and it doesn't exist in Bill and Joe. This is because Bob is the only one running. As "Orbison" is the only one with an "RBI" in it, you cannot use "most" in it. The question was grammatically incorrect.

This link will explain to you that comparative form is used when describing two objects and superlative can only be used with three or more objects. http://www.englishgrammar.org/comparative-superlative-forms/

Orbison's first name also had an "rbi" in it. He did have two and all the others had none.

Do you recall the first name? I can't seem to find it anywhere and you really can't argue that point without information as to what that name was.

Since the other three names did not have "rbi" in it, that cannot be talked about using superlative form. He could have 50 "rbis" in his name and it would still be invalid because no one else had even one. In order to use superlative form, every subject mentioned must contain that the element being discussed. So, hate to break it to you, but you're wrong and the question is faulty.

If the question was "which player has an "rbi" than it would have been correct.

A trick question is supposed to be misleading. That's the fun of it.

Well first, I did not say that trick questions were not supposed to misleading. My exact words were:

It's one thing to have trick questions, it's another to completely lie and mislead people.

You left out "completely lie" which is important to the point I was making. Yes a trick question is supposed to mislead you, but not completely. A person should still be able to find the correct answer. However, in the RBI question, there is no answer that is accurate.

A trick question, also known as a complex question, is a question where there is a presupposition regarding the answer. Even so, the answer must be valid. In this case, the question is not a trick question since there is no accurate answer at all.

For example, the presupposition here is that each person listed has to have 'rbis.' This is not a trick question because no valid presupposition exists. Someone can not have the "most" of something unless others in the group have some amount of the property that exists on an interval or ordinal scale.

So, it was not a trick question. It was a bad question with no accurate answer.

[–] nirbok085 9 years ago

It was "Saturn year," not "Jupiter year." I know; I just saw it (rerun). Do you people really watch, or are you just trying to score points against each other?

I intend to live forever, or die trying.

[–] Foxbarking 8 years ago

Well first off, I already admitted I didn't hear the part about the year. I only agreed to the "Jupiter" designation because the other poster claimed to agree to it.

Furthermore, what the hell does it matter? Obviously we watched the show, and whether it was Saturn or Jupiter is completely irrelevant to the point that we were making. The point was that I assumed it was an Earth year and I was wrong.

Do you even read the posts you respond to or do you just post responses to try and score points against people?

Either way, you failed.

[–] FlushingCaps 9 years ago

Foxbarking, I wish to agree with all that you wrote. I like it when people are willing to take the time for a lengthy response that details their opinions or fully explains the facts they wish to demonstrate. Sometimes on IMDB, I will write a basic, say, three paragraph response to someone and they will comeback accusing me of writing a college thesis, telling me I need to be more brief.

When I have watched this show, I have noted the same things you describe. I think to myself, "Oh, I just have to try to think like "they" are in order to get the answer right. Rules of the English language need to be suspended for many of the questions.

I agree with whoever it was on some post saying that this show's appeal is going to be short-lived because once people who watch it get used to the way the questions are worded to trick them, it will be easier and easier to get all your answers correct, and then the winners will simply be the folks who read faster among the two teams. This goes for the contestants, but also for people who just play along on TV. Once we start understanding how they try to trick us, we'll be able to get them all, or almost all, too easily and the game won't be much fun anymore.

[–] PopSixSquish 9 years ago

I didn't have a problem with any of those.

The first one was basically implying "Find the orange (in the image.)" Find any orange at all. A color is a noun.

And the "RBI" one? Well, yeah, technically the others would have to have at least one each for him to have "the MOST." But this show isn't that technical; in order to try and trick people, they sometimes have to be slightly incorrect in their phrasing. The guy who has one (or in this case two) has more than the guys who have none...so out of the group, people are going to say that he has the most.

The only times when Ben annoys me are those times when he's playing smug but is actually wrong himself...which has happened occasionally, such as when he said that a shark wasn't a fish. I've had to message him a couple times. ;p
And the worst was him trying to tell a lady that her dog wasn't a person. Oh, no, you did NOT! 

All in all, I'm really enjoying this show, though! It's a lot of fun to play along, and I'd love to get on it. Some of the puzzles are really great, while others I find super-easy.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]