Answer a and b: Assuming the answer means "for these two data sets, " not for movie attendance and basketball attendance in general, which would make them ridiculous answers, compare the IQR density of both: For movies, 100% of the data is distributed over a range of 90 so there is about 1.1% of the data on average over each value. The IQR of 60 contains 50% of the data, so each value accounts for 50%/60 or .83% of the data. These are fairly close.
For basketball, the figures are 100%/60 = 1.67% and 50%/50, or 1%. The overall density is almost twice as great as the IQR density.
So the IQR for movies is a better measure, because the central density and the density of the outer quarters are similar. (This does not mean that the range density is a more reliable figure. It isn't. But if the IQR and range nearly match, you can say the IQR is a better indication of the overall data distribution, than if they don't.)
To choose between c and d, the same as the choice between a and b in the first problem: In theory, the standard deviation is better, but you don't have it. The IQR is all you have. So again, it comes down to whether the answer refers to the data sets given, or all data sets of movies and basketball games. Notice that the wording is slightly different from question 8, which specifically refers to the data sets. The answers c and d here refer to movies and basketball games.
So it is possible that d could be correct here, as a matter of theory, while a could be the correct answer to 8, as a matter of practice.
Unless your instructor has gone over this difference between theory and practice and said something like, "Of course, if you don't have all the data, just the IQR, then the IQR is better," these are very poorly worded questions. I'm sorry I can't be of more help. Since you know the class context, maybe you can choose among these alternatives. I really can't.