nic_b's profile
Employee

Employee

 • 

46 Messages

 • 

2.3K Points

Tue, Nov 14, 2017 10:28 PM

Updates to Characters

Today we are modifying the display of Characters across IMDb.
 
After in-depth discussion and examination, we have decided to simplify the display of Characters on IMDb, focusing our on-going efforts towards title specific character details.  While in concept, we love the idea of character data spanning across all titles, in practice we do not feel our past experience lived up to expectations. The majority of our previous character pages were dead ends, without any related content, providing a confusing and disjointed experience.  The filmography credits were often unusable, and the bios many times were inconsistent given numerous disparate story lines. While the previous experience had drawbacks, we truly appreciate all the hard work of everyonewho contributed to characters over the years.  That said, as of today, we are simplifying the experience, allowing us to retain the character concept while building a foundation for future growth.

With today’s release we have begun this transition.  Our new character experience will support title specific images, quotes, and keywords.  Moving forward we will no longer support character filmography, biographies, videos, character lists or polls.  To aid in this transition, we are temporarily retaining our prior character experience until Dec 6th.  This will provide our users time to archive any character lists, polls or biographies which they previously created or contributed towards. If you wish to migrate any character lists or polls, we recommend rebuilding the content with an image list.  Existing character lists can also be archived by selecting the “Export this list” option. During this transition, we have temporarily retained the character search option, but will suspend support after Dec 6th.  In the coming months, we plan to re-enable character search based on our new experience.
 
We understand this is a significant change which was made only after careful consideration.  We appreciate your understanding.

Here is an example of the new experience
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080684/characters/nm0000148



Nic

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

5年前

I cannot complain quite as much about the elimination of character biographies as other features, because by virtue of the lack of volunteers in contributing to them, there was scarcely anything on them that was not better presented or maintained on Wikia, Wikipedia or whatever other wiki site using MediaWiki software or the like.

It was also annoying how many character pages were created whereby the creator did not bother to include a corresponding biography, image or quote, or whereby the character has been portrayed by only one actor and in only one title. I never understood why some contributors would do that. Things like that would sometimes present an anathema to the overall contribution effort.

Nevertheless, there was still a lot of potential to fix all of that and to improve the pages so as to make them better than what can be found around the web (mainly sites within the Wikia domain name).

4 Messages

 • 

690 Points

As with any user-created or user-expanded content, there is going to be incomplete information. But frankly: an image or a character quote was never the main reason why I visited character pages. I wanted an easily accessible (clickable) list of entries on IMDb in which a certain character was portrayed. Which is immediately the reason that I don't want to go to whatever Wiki site to find the information. I'm sure the information is there, but then I'm not on IMDb. :)

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

I totally understand, Hans Bomers. That is probably the only thing I wound up liking about character pages. Again, unfortunately most of the character pages contained just one portraying performer in just one movie/game/series, as opposed to what we would actually value in a character page. I'm sure you can imagine what terrible feeling it is to click on a character page link only to see no more information than what is provided on a name page or a title page.

4 Messages

 • 

690 Points

I get what you mean, but this was not my experience. That 99% may be right, but of course a lot of characters appear in only one film. Whenever I clicked a recurring character's name, I usually got some valuable info, even if it wasn't 100% complete.

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

Well, the main reason why my experience differs, I think, is because I visit almost every crevice of the site, and content that is either not popular, not well-advertised or lacks a cult following is severely neglected. The were thousands if not millions of character pages that did not really serve a purpose, as in:
  • Contain a screen shot
  • Contain a quote
  • Contain a biography (no matter how short)
  • Link to more than one performer (even if in the same work)
  • Link to more than one work (even if by the same performer)
  • Link to a poll

17 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

Even characters that appear in only one film were supposed to have a character page, as they could be put in characer lists. There is nonsense to quit character pages. Very bad decision!

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

That's a good point. I should've included that criterion, as the abundances of pages I'm thinking of didn't even have associations to lists.

221 Messages

 • 

6.4K Points

While I love Wikipedia, most of its pages feature bare bones character biographies or no character biographies at all. It has rules against in-universe information. 

Champion

 • 

15.6K Messages

 • 

435.3K Points

5年前

FYI

When an actor plays multiple roles in a title, IMDb now considers all of the characters effectively as one character. Tatiana Maslany in Orphan Black (TV Series) is probably the most extreme example of an actor playing multiple roles for a title, except for sketch comedy shows.

Her role for the entire series is shown as:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2234222/characters/nm1137209
Tatiana Maslany: Sarah Manning, Cosima Niehaus, Alison Hendrix, Helena, Rachel Duncan, Beth Childs, Krystal Goderitch, MK, Jennifer Fitzsimmons, Katja Obinger...

Her role for one episode, Orphan Black (TV Series) Natural Selection (2013) is shown as this on the title page:
Tatiana Maslany ... Sarah Manning / Beth Childs / Katja Obinger

and this for each of the characters:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2510426/characters/nm1137209
Tatiana Maslany: Sarah Manning, Beth Childs, Katja Obinger

4.8K Messages

 • 

134.2K Points

When I create lists, I have to delete a few because IMDb can't support more than 999 lists, now if I want to turn all my characters-poll into images-poll, can I just delete the original list once I've made the "copy"?

Champion

 • 

15.6K Messages

 • 

435.3K Points

ElM,

The short answer is yes, you can delete the original list. The admins are unlikely to repush any poll based on a character lists. Besides, all 843 character lists will disappear on December 6, 2017.

4.8K Messages

 • 

134.2K Points

Thanks, sorry to pull a Columbo but just one more thing:

Some of these characters' poll were created at the time of the old format, when I make the 'image' version, do I 'post a suggestion' as well on the GS board?

Champion

 • 

15.6K Messages

 • 

435.3K Points

If the character poll has a thread on Get Satisfaction post to that thread that you are creating an image based version of the poll in the thread with the new list link.

If the character poll does not have a Get Satisfaction post, create a new thread much like you would for any other new poll suggestion.

For all intents and purposes, the new image based versions of character polls will be considered as new poll suggestions.

4.8K Messages

 • 

134.2K Points

Thanks a lot :)

11 Messages

 • 

438 Points

5年前

So, basically you've decided to go back to the old system where you could do a free text search for characters across the board? Instead of the poorly-maintained and often incorrect character pages? Good. But a perfect example of the old adage: if it ain't broke...

But, of course, you've balanced that good move by removing another bit of character search functionality by getting rid of episode casts. Bad. Another perfect example of that old adage!

Employee

 • 

4.7K Messages

 • 

148.4K Points

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

It's a balancing act, and it only ends well if you're sober.

20 Messages

 • 

1K Points

5年前

Am I right in thinking that you're taking away character filmographies so that you can rebuild the system and eventually we'll get them back?

If so, I get that. The character pages are riddled with issues. I'd welcome a complete overhaul.

If you're just getting rid of that functionality, outright, then, honestly, I don't see the point in having character pages at all. As far as I can see, their only use is to see a list of a character's appearances through media and who's played them.

220 Messages

 • 

7.5K Points

A character filmography helps in tracking a character's appearances across media, but you can also attach pictures to a character gallery and it can assist in tracing quotes to those characters.

I've contributed on characters who have been attached to around 5-30 titles, so I've noted how helpful/extensive the character page can be.

If I may ask, what issues did you find with the character pages? What do you want in your overhaul? So far the only issues I would note were duplication of characters.

11 Messages

 • 

438 Points

Well, a lot of entries I've found on character pages are for characters whose names may look alike but actually aren't the same character. Of course, the big problem was removing the old free text character search function, which hopefully will now be restored.

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

I should hope I'm not the only one who was disappointed with the plethora of practically-empty character pages that maybe should not have been created in the first place.

20 Messages

 • 

1K Points

Issues I can remember off the top of my head:

1. This is the biggest issue in my opinion. When attempting to edit a character filmography, it's impossible to add character entries with generic names like "Bob" or "James" or "Policeman". This seems to be because once there are too many entries, IMDb gives up on trying to load them all.

A good example of this would be the character of Kate in "Blackadder II". She took on the persona of Bob, but it was impossible to add both names to the same character page because they're both so generic. Additionally, the actor reprised the role, now a judge, in another recent BBC show from one of the writers where she was credited as "Judge", but her character is meant to be the same one. It was impossible to search for and add "Judge" because, again, it was too generic.

2. Like you say, the problem of duplicate pages.

3. The system couldn't handle more complex situations. To use Blackadder as an example again, Rowan Atkinson was credited as "All Blackadders" in Blackadder Back and Forth, where he played a variety of descendants of the special's protagonist. This credit covers a variety of characters (many of whom appeared in past TV series of their own) but it was very difficult to apply the credit accurately to several different character pages without creating unwanted duplicate pages. I encounered a lot of trouble with situations along these lines.

4. The inability to add character appearances from the "themselves" section. A feature-length retrospective documentary about the sitcom Spaced was produced and included a scripted, non-documentary scene near the end where Simon Pegg and Jessica Heinz reprised their roles in the show so that we could see that they ended up as item, years after the ending of the series. It's a moment that would make a lot of sense to include in the character pages for Tim and Daisy, but wasn't possible. Another example would be the band Electric Six's lead singer, Tyler Spencer, who performs under the stage-name / character Dick Valentine. Dick Valentine had a character page but it wasn't possible to add any instances of the character performing live music such as when the band would appear on TV or the band's live-performance DVD that they produced.

2 Messages

 • 

198 Points

5年前

Sorry, but are you guys at IMDB all descended from Republican Congressmen?

You're stripping out a working (though not perfect) system, and you DO NOT HAVE the replacement even remotely ready.

Common sense would strongly suggest you keep the old system in place. build up the new system (which you're saying you're going to be doing, anyhow) in the background, test it out, show it around, and once the new system is ready to release, make the transition.

The amount of work is the same--you either create a newer, better system or you don't.  You have to transition one way or another.  Is there a negative cost associated with delaying the transition?

And think about the money you'll lose!  Currently, you have users' eyes on your pages for HOURS EXTRA while they wander around a cobbled together bunch of pages which you have already told them you are not responsible for.  So, if they have problems, it's not your fault, and they get the thrill of wandering off into the deep, dark woods on their own.  And, all the while, THEY ARE READING ADS FROM YOUR SPONSORS!  If you kill off this section with nothing to replace it, YOU WILL LOSE ALL THAT REVENUE.

Personally, I do not see the downside to letting things stay as they are until you can legitimately replace the existing system with something better.

Employee

 • 

4.7K Messages

 • 

148.4K Points

The reality is slightly different, unfortunately.  There's extra context for this at https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/topics/upcoming-changes-to-several-imdb-features-du6man1opd5q0 -- the problem is that there is a very high cost to maintaining the existing system so we need to modernize and simplify before we can move forwards, even at the expense of some feature loss. Overall it is better for all customers in the long term. 

2 Messages

 • 

198 Points

Thank you for the added explanation.

I commented because, as much as I love IMBD, you guys have made some pretty bone-headed IT-related decisions in the past.

I'm thinking, in particular, about the longest thread ever known to man and geek on one of your now-defunct discussion boards.  The "It doesn't DO anything. That's the beauty of it" discussion.

http://kcor1953beauty.tripod.com/blog/

The thread was so popular and had become so huge, that your server blocked all further posts to it.  And once further posts to it were blocked, your server then determined that the thread was stagnant, and dead, and deleted it.

All that work.  All that effort.  All that art.  All that humor.  All that love.  Lost.  All lost.  Lost like the Antikythera mechanism, drowned for untold ages in the Aegean Sea.  So sad.

34 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

Col, to be honest, it seems more like an actor/actress profile page for their involvement in the episode/movie, than a character page.  Let's look at a 'character' from "The Flash" TV series for example...
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3107288/characters/nm0146915

I clicked to see "Dr. Harry Wells" but I'm seeing all the characters combined into one profile.  That's not a character page, that's an actors page.

Now, let's go to Man of Steel...
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0770828/fullcredits#cast

Click on any of the Clark Kent entries and the expected behavior is to see the Clark Kent character, with the different actors listed.  However, each is treated as a separate page.

So instead of "modernizing and simplifying" to move forward, how about making sure that it's at least working somewhat as expected first?  As it is, it's not a character page, so you are removing the feature completely, while introducing a different feature that you are claiming is a replacement.  That's like a restaurant replacing a steak with a small bag of potato chips.  Both are edible, but claiming the chips are a replacement meat is a lie.

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

Stephen Sywak, I hope you anticipated a little attention to your first paragraph/line here, because even if done in teasing humor, it is awkward and invariably would draw some remarks (potentially off-topic). Mind you, the Republican Party has internally struggled about how to address United States (federal) programs that Congress had no business establishing in the first place. Alas, we have to take it on faith that program "slashers" do not have cruel intentions. Undoubtedly they have always leaned toward catering to large commercial organizations and thereby have shared similar lines of thinking with "businessmen".

12 Messages

 • 

870 Points

Congress had no business establishing in the first place
That is ridiculous. You or the Republican party are going to need to explain to and convince the people how the Congress of a "government of the people, by the people, for the people" with "All legislative Powers" promoting "general Welfare" had no right establishing programs that now enjoy the overwhelming support of the people and do not restrict their rights one iota. But, yes, this is off-topic.

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

There are limitations, perhaps both ways. James Madison kind of explained it a long time ago, but obviously he just one man among a group of men who contributed to founding a civil institution. As well, they have all been deceased for centuries, so maybe they do not matter. I admit that I'd be hesitant to equate either of the United States' two major parties with constitutionalist thinking. (Elected representatives do what their donors tell them to, not necessarily what is right.) Anyway, we might be pleased to know that a legislature is far less likely to cease support for a very popular/helpful program thereby commissioned than likewise a privately-owned organization to do for its programs. Notably, lots of organizations really are not predicated upon limitations of the "board", the "director" or the "staff" of the organization. The setup for civics is a bit different, since sovereign or semi-sovereign governments have the power to craft policies that licenses their persons commissioned by them to use designated or arbitrary amounts of force take a person's life, liberty, freedom, property or opportunities to pursue happiness.

3 Messages

 • 

284 Points

5年前

THIS IS GOING BACKWARDS

1 Message

 • 

182 Points

5年前

I hate this. Absolutely hate it. As you can see from all the comments there are many issues to be had with removing the character pages. Quotes & images getting chopped up, search functionality. If I wanted to check for example, what episodes of Once Upon A Time Cora is in, your site is now useless. Because I would have jump around multiple actors' filmographies to identify those episodes instead of having them in one filmography for the character. Sure, I suppose I get removing the bios due to multiple contradictory medias, but even that's silly. So what if looking up Bruce Banner gets me every cartoon, etc. the character's appeared in? That's a minor nuisance for some users and a benefit to most.

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

Yes, sadly we will have to go elsewhere to see which actresses have portrayed Cora Mills on the show. As of the time, I think there are only two, though: Barbara Hershey (regular rendition) and Rose McGowan (younger rendition). And the way that the character pages were setup, it was a little messed up. The hyperlink for Hershey's portrayal pointed to the character page for the Queen of Hearts (as whom presumably Cora only served in one episode and by a third actress whose face is concealed in a veil), whereas McGowan's portrayal pointed to the specific character of Cora Mills. It was a kind of confusing setup, possibly fixable but the site was rife with such competing links.

Champion

 • 

15.6K Messages

 • 

435.3K Points

As I pointed out elsewhere, we can use an IMDb specific search until/if IMDb restores a character search.

As an example:
Cora Mills
site:imdb.com "Cora Mills"
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aimdb.com+%22Cora+Mills%22

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

That is not a decent example, Dan Dassow. Sorry. Rose McGowan's name does not appear in the search results. I appreciate the attempt, though.

Champion

 • 

15.6K Messages

 • 

435.3K Points

Jeorj,

Rose McGowan shows up in later pages of the search. Obviously, this not very useful compared to the current IMDb character search. Sigh!
The Miller's Daughter (2013) - IMDbwww.imdb.com/title/tt2620930/mediaviewer/rm1220255744

The Miller's Daughter (2013). 17 of 17. Rose McGowan in Once Upon a Time (2011). Titles: Once Upon a Time, The Miller's Daughter. People: Rose McGowan. Characters: Rumpelstiltskin, Cora Mills. Photo by Jack Rowand - © 2013 American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

For that case, thank goodness for that caption including the whole character name of Cora Mills, as the webcrawler needed to have stumbled upon it in order to produce the result.

Champion

 • 

15.6K Messages

 • 

435.3K Points

Sadly, as the cache for the Google, Bing and other search engine web crawlers expire, these kind of results may not be available.

2 Messages

 • 

150 Points

5年前

RIP IMDb...

3 Messages

 • 

282 Points

5年前

You continue to suck harder than previously thought possible. Do us a favour Col and resign. Take all the money you want with you since it's clearly all you care about. F the users right?

2 Messages

 • 

150 Points

Years ago IMDB name did mean quality... Now it's a lot like Wikipedia, collection of misinformation collected from various sources.

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

No, no, no. It might not be a good idea if Col Needham resigned. I think a group of advisers (maybe Amazon employees appointed by Jeff Bezos) behind the scenes are manipulating him. In fact, I'm worried about what will happen when he invariably goes into retirement, say, 25 years from now. (And note also that he is a mortal man, as are we all mortal.) He is remarkably supportive, despite patronizing the IMDb subscriber base.

5.7K Messages

 • 

149.2K Points

No, no, no. It might not be a good idea if Col Needham resigned.
I think a group of advisers (maybe Amazon employees appointed by Jeff Bezos)
behind the scenes are manipulating him.
Posted 46 minutes ago (Nov 19 2017 11:56 PM)
by Jeorj Euler
- - -


IMDb was launched on October 17, 1990
Amazon.com bought IMDb in April 1998
Filmography by type for Jeff Bezos
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1757263/
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1757263/reference
- - -

Most everything here was helpful to Users and visitors

Looking at the Old IMDb Message Boards
the message time and date were the same time zone as Amazon.com
about 266,164,000 messages were posted Aug 6 2002 - Feb 20 2017
So, the Boards were on Amazons computers ?
Now not! - So, Amazon has more disk space for sales etc...


IMDb is changing (deleting) helpful parts of IMDb
for what ??
Save disk space ?
Save employee time updating pages
soon to need less employees (and that weekly pay check)

What is next on IMDbs GONE list ?
all Lists and Polls ?
Fun for Users but not needed to look up a Name or Title

Certainly with less information here less Users and others will visit
which may mean less advertisement money
well... with less Staff a lot of money is not needed


Oh, and now there are more than 82,500,000 Users
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur82500000/
Some are gone for different reasons


3 Messages

 • 

282 Points

That lack of a spine when pandering to profit-driven execs is one of the reasons he should do the decent thing and go.

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

ACT_1, well, they claimed that running the message board was not a core competency of the IMDb staff. This make sense. However, we have to wonder in what other ways are their skills limited. Maybe they cannot afford to hire many more employees of enhanced skill levels.

5.7K Messages

 • 

149.2K Points

Maybe they cannot afford to hire many more employees of enhanced skill levels
by Jeorj Euler
24 minutes ago (Nov 21 2017 1:55 am)
- - -


cms
IMDb Administrator
Status User - Fri Oct 6 2006
IMDb member since Tue Dec 18 2001
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur1488088/
former IMDb staff programmer
Once upon a time,
I developed the message boards system.
This does not mean that I am responsible for moderating it.

 I don't read any PMs, they get deleted as soon as they arrive
 I know what [mjeyds]    means
 I made this!


8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

I keep forgetting about that person. I probably have the profile page bookmarked.

5.7K Messages

 • 

149.2K Points

I keep forgetting about that person. I probably have the profile page bookmarked.
by Jeorj Euler
- - -

He is on my list of Users

So, after they ... fired him (?) No one to maintain the Boards ??

and one less employee to pay !!

- - -

film|boards
unaffiliated with imdb.com
 
https://filmboards.com/

https://filmboards.com/user/legacy/cms/

https://filmboards.com/user/legacy/Jeorj%20Euler/

https://filmboards.com/user/legacy/ACT_l/


https://filmboards.com/user/legacy/Col%20Needham/


1 Message

 • 

80 Points

I WANT THEW WRINKLE IN TIME QOTES

1 Message

 • 

242 Points

5年前

I'm sorry to see this go.  As part of my writing about "the TV Universe", the list of actors who played a certain character was instrumental.  Just today I was grateful for the list of actors who played Charles Manson.

1 Message

 • 

262 Points

5年前

Hello Nic,

I believe this is a tragic mistake.  How to find all films TV episodes with any of the following characters:

Jesus Christ
Tarzan
King Author
Flash Gordon
King Kong
Harry Potter
etc.


As of right now, just search for the character on imdb!  It generally works great and provides information that it is hard to find any other way.  WHY delete this?  Is it hurting anyone or anything?  IMDB is a great service for both DEEP FANS and general users.  This feature works reasonable well for BOTH.  It's already here.  Why kill it?!?

Champion

 • 

15.6K Messages

 • 

435.3K Points

Hi Stephen,

Sadly, the character pages depend upon old technology that IMDb is forced to phase out. I'm not happy about this, since it adversely affect the polls. I hope that the IMDb technical staff will provide an alternate means to search for characters in the future.

In the interim, you can use Google search as a less than perfect substitute.

For instance, to search for "Jesus Christ" enter the following in the search box:
site:imdb.com "Jesus Christ"
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aimdb.com+%22Jesus+Christ%22&oq=site%3Aimdb.com+%22Jesus+C...

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

We'll probably just wind up relying upon Wikipedia and Wikia.

12 Messages

 • 

870 Points

What do you mean "old technology"?
What, relational databases don't work any more? Because that's what they're populating the pages with, whether they're using an actual database for it or simply static pages built such a way as to mimic that functionality. (And it should not be that difficult to recreate identical structure in a database if the latter. All you need is some scripts and time to run them, and time you have because you can first create the complete structure and only then make it live.)

12 Messages

 • 

870 Points

And, Dan, search engines do not always give you all the results. They only give the ones that have been indexed.

Champion

 • 

15.6K Messages

 • 

435.3K Points

djv-6,
And, Dan, search engines do not always give you all the results. They only give the ones that have been indexed.
We are in violent agreement on that point.

3 Messages

 • 

284 Points

Dan, I don't understand how these pages use old technology.  You're still having to use relational databases or as djv-6 said above, static pages built to mimic the functionality, when creating the quotes character pages (which are pointless, sorry). It seems to me IMDB just doesn't want to keep up with the complexity of the old character pages. Can you tell us the real reason?  Ok so I just read some of Col Needham's posts on this thread and he explains things very well. So now I understand. Go read his responses on page one of this thread start at the top. They do want to eventually go back to the character pages as they are now.

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

Kat Cody Roberts, can you tell which IMDb site pages are part of the old platform versus the newer? We can all tell by the layout. All of the pages generated by the old software have the index of sibling path pages (of a given IMDb subject [title, real person, fictional character or so]) listed on the left side of the page, whereas the newer has them listed on the right.

12 Messages

 • 

870 Points

Unlike Kat suggested, Col Needham's posts on this thread didn't explain much to me.

Upon reading the Upcoming changes... thread, however, it seems to me that the whole site has been built as a patchwork of (at the time) hyped-up technologies or home-brewed kludges without any larger design, each with their own particular system, instead of doing things right. It also seems that now the hardware on the system with the character information is dying or the system is reaching its EOL one way or another and so, rather than doing the right thing this time by importing the data in the new system, the IMDb is (again) taking the easy way out and simply scrapping the data along with the old system. In its place, it seems, they are scraping together a feature on the new system that sort of looks like the old without its actual functionality with promises that all will be well at some unspecified future date. That's what this seems to me.

I simply don't see a way to look at this and not think this is simply poor change management and intentionally throwing away data and features that could be fairly easily preserved. All it really takes is some scripting and processing time for it to run, unless they've really screwed the pooch.

8.2K Messages

 • 

185.9K Points

It does feel slightly like a "nuke the ghetto" situation.

2 Messages

 • 

240 Points

4年前

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Character page.

Changes to character pages
Would IMDb please return them to their original formats. Thank you. 
It helps when you want to see else has played the characters in other adaptations eg
Sherlock Holmes, Dracula etc. It also makes it easier to find the titles of these movies or tv adaptations

Champion

 • 

1.3K Messages

 • 

43.8K Points

4年前

Hello Col et al,
Have you given any consideration to something that I suggested on the old message board system soon after you first introduced Character pages - that you restrict them to those that have something on the character page (some trivia or a full biography). There are too many IMHO where you have a Character page that doesn’t say anything much about the character, just giving a filmography. That leads to confusion with too many different characters on the same page

Steve

12 Messages

 • 

870 Points

The filmography is the most useful thing about character pages. The trivia is nice but that's just a low-brow distraction. By you logic they should get rid of most of the actor pages as well, because, in addition to filmography, most of them only contain the most inane stuff, if even that.

17 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

Yes, djv-6, off course, you are absolutely right. People are really missing the point about what character pages are important for. That is a shame.

292 Messages

 • 

6.7K Points

4年前

Something to know about Characters on IMDB having their own pages, it allows you to see a good amount of details about them on the site, not to mention that it allows us to see quotes from each film specifically from them.

292 Messages

 • 

6.7K Points

I mean Quotes pages don't have any option for viewing quotes spoken only by a Certain Character.

1 Message

 • 

240 Points

4年前

This truly makes IMDb less useful, and I will be spending _much_ less time on the site, with many fewer eyeballs in front of you advertisers.