Simple, brief critique buttons

Many newcomers seem not to understand how this forum is organized or how it works. You could not be sure that they are doing annoying things on purpose.

I guess I could see that, but your descriptions were far more complex. The idea was simple buttons indicating a more basic, general reason in those categories. Your idea to having a polar vote for these things would be better served by a “not enough nudity” or “to little realistic violence” buttons. Also, people make compromises to things they consume, using a cost/benefit analysis to the products they consume. If money was the only way to show our like or dislike for certain aspects of consumer products, there wouldn’t be billions spent in marketing and product design based on polls, feedback, and critiques of their products. This idea is more easily analyzed and simpler to understand to help them improve their product.

Hi, Tim,

My point wasn't really to suggest that we vote in favor of more T&A (although I get really tired of presentations that become so cleansed that they don't represent reality).  But your suggestion seems intended to make it easier for people with just one philosophical or theological perspective to have more influence ("help them improve their product"), and that isn't IMDb's place (in my opinion, I don't work here, I'm just a user.)  Other groups would have other concerns, relating to not only sex and violence, but how films present religion, politics, economics, etc.  Their concerns are just as valid as yours or mine, and the only fair way to address it would be Ed's all-inclusive button... unfeasible, of course.

The polar vote you mention exists now: each of the Parents Guide categories can be voted as "none", "mild", "moderate", or "severe".  I look at (and vote on) these, and I'm occasionally surprised at the spectrum of opinions indicated, and how the numbers break down.  This seem to be what you were asking for, isn't it?

I would be astounded if every producer in Hollywood was not already aware of the desire of a sizable minority of viewers to view "clean" fare.  How they decide what to produce would have to be addressed by someone more knowledgeable than myself.  My understanding is that most films lose money, but beyond that, I don't know.

I wish you good viewing!

The idea is to keep the categories as BASIC as possible though. The categories I suggested are already there and are the usual categories people use to decide to watch the movies/shows. Honestly, some more basic categories could FEASIBLY be added such as the ones you mentioned (politics, religion, economics). Getting too much more detailed than that makes it much more difficult to do a quantifiable index for each of these categories. And a “mild,” “moderate,” or “severe” rating doesn’t indicate like or dislike, but rather quantity of these categories. I’m not saying it is IMDb’s Responsibility, as my caveat indicates, but thought it would be beneficial to their users, as well as the movie/TV industry, and there IS a definite profitable business relationship between IMDb and the film industry, not just in ads, but when their whole page is advertising a blockbuster movie with intricate website design, it’s clear their relationship benefits both. And I don’t have statistics on the “sizeable minority” numbers (although I will be searching) but I think it is actually a sizeable majority that have some desire in at least one of these main categories that they want to see decreased, or even increased, but just suffer with what they get because of their heavy interest in seeing the movie, or in some cases, because they wouldn’t be able to watch very many films/shows otherwise. Everybody I think has a point at which they decide the film is TOO MUCH or not enough of something, and often, I would think, they would fall in some of these basic categories. I appreciate the respectful response also, by the way. This is how ideas develop.