IMDb Advanced Search Redesign

Is there a way to return to the title you were at when you go back after clicking on a title?  If there are 1000 results and I am at 876 and click it, when I go back it takes me back to 250 and I have to scroll down to 500 and then again to 750 and then find 876.  

@lhanes​ I think the only solution for now is to open the page in a new tab.

Hi @ACT_1  & @jeorj_euler​ -

The previous announcement thread was primarily for the Beta, we typically post a new announcement thread for the official launch.

I hope this helps!

@Michelle​ 

A lot of feedback in the other thread was not addressed or taken into account.

Hi @Peter_pbn​ -

The team reviews user feedback daily, and has iterated on functionality based on the feedback received. We have also included details on improvements in the launch FAQs. We appreciate all feedback and will continue to monitor it to ensure we are catching any bugs and identifying other future feature improvements opportunities. 

@alja_ciber​ and genre too.

@plur62​ I was so taken aback by the "update" I didn't even notice that at first.

The search engine is totally unusable at the moment. Let's hope for some improvements in the near future. 

Me too. That's my biggest problem. Imagine you search "French movies I've seen form the 70s" in order to check the main actors among 100 results. You can't, you have to click the {i} button one by one. We want the old display, the one still used in lists (or do we have to worry about them too?).

Since, my watch list is empty I thought of checking all the search results and then see them in watchlist but even the display in watchlist has changed! Is it possible for the user to make an automatic list of the results so he can really examine them?

Hi @wilderbyfar​ -

Thank you for your feedback. The team is evaluating options to improve the use case for matching and we will look to make this improvement in the future. We will also provide an update once this is complete.

I surmise that it prevents unsophisticated Web crawlers from scanning the entire body of search results in a given search query that may have its corresponding URL mentioned somewhere on the world-wide Web, thus saving some of IMDb's bandwidth consumption or at least reducing the amount of siphoning of IMDb data for those who aren't adamant about that. The interesting thing is that most websites are adopting these approaches, so it might all just be indicative an aberration in the database engine software libraries that may just as well be being used by the numerous and various Web developers behind many contemporary websites who nearly all appeal to the lowest common denominator when it comes to trying to attract and retain visitors.

Hi @Peter_pbn​ -

Thank you for your feedback. You are 100% correct and the team is working to update the example text.

A huge drawback for me in this downgrade is that in the results page you can't even see the pictures of the results.  I use this almost exclusively to view the birthdays for the day.  This has made it nearly useless.

Hi, Slava. You'e not seeing posters when searching for titles? That doesn't sound like something that is supposed to happen. What is going on? Could you present here a screen shot?

@jeorj_euler​  These pictures are tiny.  In the old version they were at least big enough to see who you were looking at.

A few times the old version was back for a part of a day, but then this new joke would again rear its ugly head.  I have now given up clicking on the Born Today link on the home page, as it is now consistently only the garbage shown above.  The pictures on the home page are smaller than on the old Born Today page, and they are oval, which can cut off some things, but it's still a great deal better than what was done to the results page.  Now all I have to fear is the inevitable deconstruction of the Home Page.

Czechoslovakia is also not on the list

Hi @Peter_pbn​ -

Just confirming that this is no longer supported as a URL parameter.

Okay, but there is no need to remove the "has" parameter. Will it be replaced with something superior?

@jeorj_euler​ 

They didn't remove the "has" parameter, just the ability to exclude it.

@Peter_pbn​ 

They didn't remove the "has" parameter, just the ability to exclude it.

I am going to talk to the search team about this as the requirements were that the new search had to be backwards compatible with the old one (minus a few impractical edge cases).  The exclusion of “has” is useful for locating data gaps and therefore encouraging data contribution. 

@Peter_pbn We have confirmed that this was missed in the requirements and the team will take a look once we have completed the next phase of the launch. 

@Peter_pbn​ The fix for this is now live, although please note the placement of the "!" here.  Examples:

ANS -> https://www.imdb.com/search/name/?birth_date=1945-01-01,1963-12-31&has=!death-date&birth_place=england&gender=male&count=50 

ATS -> https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?title_type=feature&has=!trivia

@lhanes​ During the beta, I was able to add 

&count=250

to the url.

(I don't have access yet to the new ATS.)

Sometimes it will be available in incognito sessions with renewed cookies.

@losingmymind​ Thanks for the feedback.  Please see the Advanced Search FAQ at https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/new-features-updates/advanced-search-redesign/G73SLJ6K33AA6NB5 

Sorry if I'm being incredibly thick here, but I clicked the above link which takes you to the FAQ page, but there appears to be no mention anywhere about using the old version Advanced Search.

Does this mean it simply does not exist anymore?

I too cannot work with the new design, and need the older version back to work with.

Am I missing something obvious here?

@Freezageeza​ The old version of ATS was retired when this announcement was posted back at the start of November. While we do allow customers to switch back and forth between old and new versions during the beta testing period, but once the new software launched the old one is removed. 

The new ATS is designed to be backwards compatible with the old version (outside of the design) so we should be able to help if there's a search filter/sort which you have not been able to locate in the new version; there are also still a few pending bugs and enhancements in the queue to be released. 

Hi.

There's nothing wrong at all with the search filters from my point of view. It was just that I had several saved A to Z searches on different genres of movie on the old version. Page format made it very easy for me to save a particular search at a certain point (eg page 210 on Sci Fi movies), as the search would quite literally return thousands of results. Basically I used the search to find movies I may have missed out on, or not even heard of over the years, and an A to Z search seemed the logical way to find them.

The redesign has taken away the page format, and the constant scrolling to find the point I left off from is really frustrating.

I read somewhere that the page format is not coming back (although I'm not sure why). The way it's set out on the screen has been my only problem with it, but it's a big one from my point of view.

Thank you for getting back to me so quickly and clarifying the above.

Hi @dingbatterwarrior​ -

To clarify, there has been no change to initial result sets. Previously the page would load 50 at a time and the functionality has not changed with the new page.

Do you have an example you can share to demonstrate the limited views?  It's possible that you may have filters/refiners selected that would show fewer results.

Hi Michelle - here's a link to a search I created with a similar issue.  As I recall the old system gave the option (which I no longer see) of choosing 50, 100 or 250 results/page and would then give easy access to all pages of results.  On the link here if you want to see more than the first 50 results you have to scroll to the end of the page and click "50 more" and keep doing that for each additional 50 results.  That's a lot of scrolling and clicking to see all the results.  And I found that after opening a title page and then clicking the back button to return to the results, the system "forgot" all the previous "50 more" clicks I'd done and once again only showed the first 50.  Another user suggested I open a title in a new window or tab and that should work but it would be nice if the system could "remember" where I left off and take me back there instead of ground zero. He also showed me how to show more than 50 results by adding "&count=250" to the end of the url but with results in the thousands even having 250 on a page means a lot of scrolling and adding.  Thanks for looking into this - https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?title_type=feature,tv_series,short,tv_episode,tv_miniseries,tv_movie,tv_special,tv_short,video&user_rating=7,7&num_votes=527,

@Michelle I appreciate your response. In the old compact viewing option I was able to view much more titles on my screen without having to scroll compared to the new compact viewing option. I have attached the comparison.

Instead now it presents results items in manner like YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Twitch, X/Twitter, TikTok et al. do.

@UserName12345​ I'm in a similar boat, without proper pagination I have no desire to use the site anymore.