We propose a novel method for analyzing and visualizing the complexity of standard reinforcement learning (RL) benchmarks based on score distributions. A large number of policy networks are generated by randomly guessing their parameters, and then evaluated on the benchmark task; the study of their aggregated results provide insights into the benchmark complexity. Our method guarantees objectivity of evaluation by sidestepping learning altogether: the policy network parameters are generated using Random Weight Guessing (RWG), making our method agnostic to (i) the classic RL setup, (ii) any learning algorithm, and (iii) hyperparameter tuning. We show that this approach isolates the environment complexity, highlights specific types of challenges, and provides a proper foundation for the statistical analysis of the task's difficulty. We test our approach on a variety of classic control benchmarks from the OpenAI Gym, where we show that small untrained networks can provide a robust baseline for a variety of tasks. The networks generated often show good performance even without gradual learning, incidentally highlighting the triviality of a few popular benchmarks.