Employee
•
5K Messages
•
53.3K Points
IMDb Name Page Redesign
We are excited to announce the launch of IMDb’s redesigned Name pages! These pages are meant to make your IMDb experience easier and more enjoyable by providing better access to photos and videos, an upgraded view of an individual’s credits, and improved mobile navigation making it easier to view IMDb features on the go. These enhancements reflect changes suggested by IMDb customers, as well as our own in-depth research designed to enhance entertainment content, discovery, and navigation. More information is available in the FAQ on the help page.
We hope you enjoy these latest improvements, and thank you for continuing to make IMDb the world’s most trusted source for movie, TV, and entertainment content.
— The IMDb Team
English | Français | Deutsch | हिन्दी | Italiano | Português | Español
Col_Needham
Employee
•
7.1K Messages
•
176.6K Points
2 years ago
A quick general update not in response to any specific new feedback. First, thanks for all of the continuing feedback which is being read and weighed by the IMDb team. A reminder as described elsewhere in the thread that as with all redesigns, we expect the vast majority of feedback here to be negative since the people enjoying the changes have little motivation to comment. On the other hand: please be aware that the design was built in many rounds of consultation with multiple IMDb customer groups; we held an opt-in beta across the summer open to all customers and around one million people tried the design, resulting in complaints from less than one hundred of those one million; we have made changes to the design based on feedback in that beta; the updated design has been available for over a month and has been used by more than one hundred million customers, resulting in even a smaller percentage of complaints (again less than one hundred people). We appreciate that all change is hard, but we encourage you to give yourself time to adjust to the expanded features of the new pages.
The new name pages work across all device sizes; they are available in eight additional languages beyond English; they improve consistency with the rest of the site & our mobile apps; and they comply with the latest accessibility standards. All this is to enable IMDb to better scale and grow our audience into the future. The full launch will enable a further enhancement in terms of even faster page loading speeds once we are able to activate client-side rendering. We also have other enhancements in the pipeline which are now easier thanks to the new technology.
A reminder to read the FAQ at https://help.imdb.com/article/issues/GMWASETVPLJYXEZE/ and do take the time to explore the significantly more powerful options available to sort and filter credits. In particular, see the "All topics" menu in the upper right of the page and the blue filter symbol under the "Credits" heading. All of the old features / sorts / links / subpages are still available.
For those people seeking a quick route to view all credits in the older IMDb design, we have renamed "Text view" to "All credits" for clarity in the "All topics" menu as shown here (see red highlight to activate the menu and yellow highlight to access the all credits link):
The equivalent "Text view of credits" label in the filter menu will be similarly updated soon.
For much more detail on how and why the pages were updated, please see our replies across the eight pages of this thread; employee replies such as this one are tagged with a green badge and "Employee" under the name of the name of the person posting.
Hope this helps.
20
rhgrafix
8 Messages
•
166 Points
2 years ago
Please make an option to remain on the old format, it's way better.
2
urbanopolis
2 Messages
•
70 Points
2 years ago
Note: Please fire your designer, this new version blows. Straight out of 2005. Blinding white space amount, tiny text, impossible to casually navigate, no dark mode., and on and on.
Face it , it's terrible. I am sure IMDB arrogance won't change what they worked "so hard" on.
I'm out
0
pexu
3 Messages
•
350 Points
2 years ago
The funny part is that this is being sold as a slick and fast version while in fact each page load requires almost twice the bandwidth what it was with the good and tried reference view (it hasn't been a featherlight champion either for a long time, that must be said). Perhaps even funnier is that on a site, which is dedicated to moving pictures, of that transferred data only 30% is visual content.
While the above is just nitpicking, forcefully sticking to a single design, truth if you will, seems rather odd. People have different preferences, and so have had applications for many decades. Just because there are multiple options, or even themes, doesn't mean that the brand would be lost behind countless menus and selections.
I guess this is what this is all about. Users do not bring in the money, advertisers do. Having a compact text view automatically is good for the user but bad for the business. The world has very quickly shifted to service and subscription based model. I wonder when the next "design refresh" comes if there is even a non-subscription option left.
It has been a good 20 years with IMDb so far, but eventually everything good must come to an end I'm afraid. Not that previously all was better. Using a typical connection way back then it would have taken several minutes just to load the "new refreshed look".
0
urbanopolis
2 Messages
•
70 Points
2 years ago
Dear IMDB, 2003 called and they want their designer back. This new option blows.. Blinding amount of white space, impossible to casually navigate. tiny text, no dark mode, and on, and on.
We know you won't change it because you already wasted truck loads of money on it. but
really though, have a good look, it's bad.
0
jaimevermeulen
10 Messages
•
220 Points
2 years ago
how can i go back to the old layout view which was alot better for older people
1
gkoeppen
3 Messages
•
92 Points
2 years ago
This format SUCKS. How can I go back to the original format.
0
EricKapenstein
2 Messages
•
70 Points
2 years ago
Literally unusable. I'm flabbergasted by the utter incompetence of this latest redesign. Please, dear God, go back and FIRE whoever did this.
0
Kid_Shelleen
2 Messages
•
72 Points
2 years ago
I prefer the old format. This one seems awkward and difficult to navigate.
1
tombrennan_ymail
7 Messages
•
150 Points
2 years ago
Since (at least for me) all the other pages I regularly view have remained in the old style, when can I expect those to take on the new format and make me even more upset when using this great web site?
0
plur62
248 Messages
•
5.6K Points
2 years ago
I prefer phone version of View all credits, it's perfect (just like before):
5
Stardust
5 Messages
•
106 Points
2 years ago
I really do not like the new page design and format at all. Is there an option to have the information displayed in the previous format. I much prefer the "classic" layout and look to this new design.
10
rev678
7 Messages
•
146 Points
2 years ago
I still cannot figure out how this new page redesign makes things "easier". Biographical information was the whole point of profile pages. Birth year/place and death year/place was the focal point. Now the emphasis seems to be on photos and videos for profile pages. They are much harder to navigate. The previous version was still working on Microsoft Edge until yesterday. Total bummer.....
(edited)
1
racliff
31 Messages
•
456 Points
2 years ago
This is exhausting. Another format change based on the 'how can we screw things up now' strategy. I would prefer returning layouts available 15 or 20yrs ago, but we're not going to see that. Sadly the posted comments here contain expected responses. And for the most part, IMDB doesn't care what the users think, or like or don't like. Somebody in charge has their agenda to cram down the throats of everyone.
The agenda highlights here are pretty much the same as other websites.
Get rid of all of the photos -- I can select them if I want.
Organize and tidy up the layout -- I know how to read.
Go back 20yrs please.
4
dcarley
4 Messages
•
98 Points
2 years ago
Guys, on the bright side, at least it beats this from 2015
1
0