What movies or series feel like well structured puzzles that reward actually paying attention?

What movies or series feel like well structured puzzles that reward actually paying attention?

51 cubes

51

not possible to know

21

you're making assumptions

you can literally count out the number of boxes retard

Are you people serious? It's 27 cubes. This isn't that difficult.

At least 35 but no more than 51

35

Not enough info, need other side and front view.
You're assuming that the sides are stacked symmetrically. Fatal mistake.

113

0. There are three drawings of a trailer, but no actual trailer in sight.

Oh wait. I misspoke and also apparently am retarded. It's 51.

but no more than 51

Wrong, the other side could be stacked with thousands of tiny little cubes.

Only one side is shown. Answering 51 would assume the other side and the middle row are also filled the same way, but it seems like a reasonable assumption.

63.
Just count the cubes from the side view and multiply by 3.

the only guy in the thread who got it right

Then how come you got the wrong number?

Those are rectangular prisms not cubes

NTA but.....
He's right. We are assuming that their are no missing cubes behind those shown in the side view. Those missing cubes would be impossible to see from the top or back views. If we assume the cubes are uniform for each side then yes the answer is 51 but if this isnt the case than the answe could be anywhere between 38 and 51

You know how to do it but you got the wrong number? How?

more than three

Coz I'm a retard. But the explanation is correct I just saw rows of 4 for some reason. Just took some kratom an hour ago everything fuzzy

38

It's impossible to tell if underneath they are based on dwarfs.

Zero.
Those are NOT cubes.
They are technically irregular cuboids, due to a fundamental measurement paradox when comparing arbitrarily-defined widths, lengths and heights (see coastline paradox as a good example).

17x3 equal 51

46

There are no cubes
It's all one solid piece

29

BORN TO BE WILD

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy but only because it's told non-linearly.

Now you see me

Minimum of 31 and maximum of 51

But there are three trailers...

Min 35
Max 62

51

there could be cubes missing from the centre row. since the top doesn't show depth, how would you know?

assuming just the bottom, one row, and one column are full

minimum: 21+6+5+3=35

assuming each row is full:

maximum: (7*3*3)-(4*3) = 63-12=51

so somewhere between 35 and 51

There's more on top than the sides so it can't be 51.

you cant answer without assuming, so shut the fuck up because 51 is the bet answer you can get with the provided info, faggot

>maximum: (7*3*3)-(4*3) = 63-12=51

so somewhere between 35 and 51

I'm a retard. I counted the stacks not realizing I could just count the side. First stack 21, then 18, then 12. Got the same answer but took way longer.

0. those are squares.

what if the middle of the stack is empty except for the back and bottom?

holy shit he actually did it

(4x9)+(2x6)+(1x3)
Side and back are what you need for this, top is really only showing conformity of the non viewed side.
The objection that you haven’t seen all sides makes no sense since by that logic we will never know if there are miniature boxes or an elephant in the middle of the stack either which would make all these puzzles unsolvable. That’s just being a retard and thinking you’re clever.

But it might not be missing any at all
You provide no answer, my anon's such a bore

I read the thread I get that it's some kind of "don't make assumptions" BS now. I don't care. I make assumptions every day. I'm assuming it's not a trick so I'm counting boxes.

Anon you might be retarded

writing your own name on your skateboard

fucking poser faggot

Anon Babble was able to easily solve this. can Anon Babble do it?

Seems based to me, what a chad

Fuck that fancy math bullshit I let all that stuff leave my brain after I didn't need it anymore.

G-Guys...

You should stop being a gross fag

69.
51 1x1s, 16 2x2s , 2 3x3s

Can anyone figure out the solution for this? It's literally impossible.

No point in trying since you say it's literally impossible