IMDb Name Page Redesign

I'm not aware of too many genuine worldwide-focused alternatives to IMDb, but there are two maybe three derivative websites serving very vaguely as mirrors of IMDb. (They have different designs from IMDb, but a vast majority of their data comes from IMDb.) One example is MovieChat, which I only use to view a rough archive of the retired IMDb message boards and subsequent posts to those boards or messages.

Yes, there are a few awesome features. For this reason, I've only really complained about the JavaScript bloat present in the new platform as shared by both IMDb title pages and IMDb name pages, in the default view, likewise how the "all topics" menu isn't pre-loaded when the page is visited. The way "known for" looks now is such a painful waste of space (as it is supposed to look like a row of contiguous posters), but that can probably be fixed with a bookmarklet or monkey script. I've not really bothered to reflect on and complement for the cool new features, as they don't really matter than much.

@zvona2222​ You might find our update from last week helpful, particularly the point around the “All credits” view -> https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/imdb-name-page-redesign/6351563ae7100d725d54c0bb?commentId=63878b2b038ef261b8f4b7fb

@Col_Needham​ Thanks but I'm discontented with the option to every time I visit IMDB have to click on All Topics>All Credits

So if you don't bring it back unfortunately I won't use IMDB anymore to check on actors and directors, I'll go now in pursuit of another site ( luckily if there is any other than this )

I commented on this with friends and most of them are dissatisfied

@Rake1204​ 

Pages don't load, directors pages are missing and and keeps saying 'problem, try again later'

Sorry to hear this.  Please can you provide some examples of directors pages which you describe as “missing” and details of what you mean.  Also the same for pages which do not load?  

I'm sorry but the new layout is not good or interesting and frankly, awkward to navigate.  There was nothing wrong with the old version.  

For example...

@martin_695862​ wrote: I am also concerned that IMDB may start to redesign the layout of all its other pages as time goes on - that this is only the beginning of further reduction in usability and naff layout that looks good on a mobile phone for casual browsing but which is dumbed-down, cut into bite-size chunks, and generally worsened as a serious research/contribution tool.

Yeah, this is kind of my fear going forward as well.

But one thing I learned from this debacle is, next time I see a beta preview offered, I'll have to put in some effort to check it out and provide feedback instead of just ignoring it like I've done countless times on countless websites, most I don't use at any rate like IMDb. There have been a few others who've mentioned ignoring the beta preview -- and I honestly only have a vague recollection of that and don't remember how it was introduced to users or how it asked for user input/feedback. But I've also learned over the years that management has an agenda which it tasks the design team to implement. Designers also have goals and no one wants to be the website that's not moving in the general direction of the rest of Internet. Not sure I know of a website that puts user wants/needs foremost in the design process, so it almost always feels like, "It's not broke, so we're fixing it because we can."

Discerning IMDb's last generation software platform from the IMDb's new software platform isn't too difficult. Thus far, any page besides a base IMDb name page, a base IMDb title page, the IMDb home page or certain IMDb search results pages is basically generated on the older system.

@xianjiro​ Exactly.  I'd bet people who (like me), tried the beta, hated it, and went back to the option of the old page, never had a reason to complain until the change was forced upon them.  That means the communication back to the designers had a small percentage of heavy critics, if any.  So if that's the public group the designers used to assure approval, it wasn't a very good way of polling.  Hopefully they will read through some of the comments here and rethink.  Until then, when I look up a name and want to see if that name is in a specific movie or show, now I need to scroll down, find the "See all" button, click it, wait, and then do ctrl-F in chrome to find the show I'm interested in.  Instead of just ctrl-F.  Then if I want to see the episode details... oh, don't start me on that programming fiasco.  Sure, the new initial page load saves bandwidth because it doesn't load the entire list.  But the only reason bandwidth became a problem was because they added unneeded pictures to each line.  What is it about people who see a pretty interface saying, "I really like it", even when usability is compromised?

And please don't respond to this with the repeated, "All Credits" post.  It's not the same thing.  Not anywhere near the same thing.

@xianjiro 

@martin_695862​ wrote: I am also concerned that IMDB may start to redesign the layout of all its other pages as time goes on - that this is only the beginning of further reduction in usability and naff layout that looks good on a mobile phone for casual browsing but which is dumbed-down, cut into bite-size chunks, and generally worsened as a serious research/contribution tool.

Yeah, this is kind of my fear going forward as well.

Unfortunately, this is not just a fear, but reality:

When will other pages switch to the new technology and new design?

Source: https://help.imdb.com/article/issues/GMWASETVPLJYXEZE

Discussion of the impending changes: https://twitter.com/skogesT/status/1598954885461921792

For the most part, public outcry is not really a thing in regards to website redesigns. A few times before on this thread, the YouTube redesign of autumn 2022 has been mentioned, and while hundreds of millions of people noticed the design, only something like several dozen people have taken a little bit of time to post public opinions about it. Reddit is probably the only website in recent history that had website maintainers respond in an acquiescing manner to visitors' complaints. (In other words, the old Reddit layout exists but it is hidden.) Granted, YouTube has always been very gradual about its redesign processes, casual visitors won't even notice changes. IMDb unfortunately has seen numerous jarring changes since 2017, but even so, the various features (apart from the site-native message boards) forgone had a very tiny fan base, which sort of implies underutilization anyway.

@jeorj_euler​ as well as the massive loss of enjoyment of this site which the catastrophic removal of the message boards caused, I also miss "Where Are They Now?", alternative names, and character pages.

The character pages were a wonderful idea, being able to instantly look at somebody like Sherlock Holmes, and see all the people who had played him, photographs, quotes, and wiki bios.  Crazy that a movie site has no way to study characters actually.  Not to mention all the work which people put into them which was instantly lost.

@Rake1204​ 

Using the collaboration search for titles, I infer that the page of your  snapshot is for

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000759/

and I don't have a problem viewing his credits.

What OS/browser are you using?

Mine is Windows 11 and Chrome 108 or Firefox 107.

Might be interesting to check the total amount of bytes of data is downloaded just to properly display a page on the new software platform. It's sure to be way over half a megabyte, which doesn't seem like much, until things add up. Even with a fast connection, a fast GPU and lots of RAM, delays will emerge whenever any of these things are somehow (and for whatever reason) operating at nearly capacity. There is a thing called virtual RAM too, or swap, and it is slower than raw volatile RAM.

@Hangerz22​ You might find our update from last week helpful, particularly the point around the “All credits” view -> https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/imdb-name-page-redesign/6351563ae7100d725d54c0bb?commentId=63878b2b038ef261b8f4b7fb

@jeorj_euler​ 

Yes, it's useless.  

@jeorj_euler​ Please follow the advice in https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/general-information/why-is-imdb-displaying-differently-on-my-browser/GF2ZAR69V859XLHF as you appear to be the only person reporting this specific issue. If you can reproduce it with a clean, modern, supported browser and operating system, off VPN, and without plug-ins, please let us know (a) which browser / system configurations were still broken like this (b) the results of a speed test from fast.com or similar (c) in which country you are located.  Thanks. 

Right, but that is no excuse for designing the "all topics" to be dependent upon AJAX/fetch, which creates somewhat of an obstacle to forcing it to load automatically as the page loads. The reason for having all these third party scripts (all of my own design) in the first place is because of the terrible aspects of the design (or broken things) that have existed since apparently 2010. The situation is even worse now, because the new design is made in such a way as to "resist", so to speak, these corrective scripts. Because IMDb only party-way through the software platform migration, I'm inclined to wait until it finished before reworking the scripts.

@Col_Needham​ 

You've got to be joking.  I've just read dozens of others complaints on here!  It is still doing it, and I can't even see a person's history now at all.  

Why did you change something that worked fine before? I won't be using this anymore.  Truly hideous layout and even worse service.  

@zydecopolka​ 

You even have to search for the bio link now.

And even worse, the bio link only has some of the relevant info on each celebrity -- for example, their social media links are not included on their bio pages. 

With the old name pages, everything used to be in one place, at a glance: the person's birthdate and birthplace, the intro paragraph from their bio, their social media links, their trivia, and most importantly, their full filmography. 

Now, with the redesign, only some of that stuff is available on the name pages, and all of it is broken up into several different subpages (most of which are not easy to find the links to directly from the name pages). 

A lot of people have complained about the "Known For" part of the redesigned name pages. But that isn't really the problem, since that also existed on the older version of the name pages.

The bigger problem is the removal of the full filmography from the name pages, combined with placing movie images/posters into the truncated filmography that now appears on the name pages. Those changes were unnecessary and they are causing the vast majority of the problems people are complaining about here.

@keyword_expert​ 

Now, with the redesign, only some of that stuff is available on the name pages, and all of it is broken up into several different subpages (most of which are not easy to find the links to directly from the name pages). 

Sorry, but none of these things have been removed from the new name pages. No changes have been made to the name subpages either, and we ensured that all content / links present on the old name pages are still on the new ones. If there is anything missing it is simply an oversight and we will take a look — please provide a specific example using archive.org to illustrate, thanks. 

[Edited on 12/14 to acknowledge that the "Available on Prime Video" widget has been removed, although more wide availability information has been added to each individual title in a filmography to compensate instead; discussion and details here]

@Col_Needham​ 

Filmographies

Regarding people's full filmographies, I didn't realize it until you brought it up, but apparently that info is still there on name pages, but only with a bunch of counterintuitive clicks to pull it up.

A related problem is that the name pages seemingly arbitrarily choose which project type to feature as the default for each person, which leads to odd results, like making it appear at first glance that Fred Armisen is more known for being a composer than an actor, and Barbara Streisand more known for being an actress than a musician. (I realize some of these problems predate the redesign, but these problems are more pronounced with the redesign, because the different modules for accessing filmography credits are now somewhat buried behind counterintuitive filter buttons rather than text labels like the old design.)

Fred Armisen

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0035488/

https://web.archive.org/web/20220408042709/https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0035488/

Barbra Streisand

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000659/

https://web.archive.org/web/20210304020404/https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000659/

"Did you Know" section

Here are some examples of name pages where the "Did you Know" section has been removed in the new redesign:

Tiphany Adams

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4970055/

https://web.archive.org/web/20191028134257/https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4970055/

Hannah Diamond

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5730258/

https://web.archive.org/web/20210804170635/https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5730258/

Arthur Hughes

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0400458/

https://web.archive.org/web/20210309123416/http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0400458/

Birthplaces

Regarding birthplaces, with the old design the birthplaces were prominently stated at the top of the page next to the birthdates. The new redesign only states the birthdates, with no mention of birthplaces, at the tops of the pages (except for people who have narrative bios that mention their birthplaces). That led me to believe that birthplaces are now omitted from name pages. After receiving your response I looked more closely and realized that birthplaces are still on name pages, but they are placed way down the pages toward the bottom, after some irrelevant stuff (like the huge module for "IMDb Best of 2022").  I prefer listing birthplaces along with birthdates at the tops of pages, as in the old design. 

Subpages and "All Topics" menu

As for the subpages, while it's true that these have always been separated from each other, my point is they were all more easily accessible from each person's name pages, which was essentially a usable "master page" for each person. Now, with the redesign, the links to many of the subpages are buried under the cryptically labeled "All topics" menu, which is practically hidden in the top right corner of the page, separated from other labels that clearly have something to do with the person  (like "Biography" and "Awards"), making this stuff nearly impossible to find unless someone tells you where to look. Here was my feedback on this issue, previously stated in this same thread:

@Col_Needham​ 

Specific things missing:

Related News  (saw that it's on the left instead of right now)

On Prime Video

User Polls (I have seen this on other people)

Example:

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1259728/

https://web.archive.org/web/20220827034346/https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1259728/

I confirmed using the filmosearch for this person that IMDb has 9 Prime Videos, so that category is not absent for lack of data.

@bderoes​ Thanks for the examples ...

Related News  (saw that it's on the left instead of right now)

We are not sure what you mean by "on the left" ... the news widget is further down the page after "Did You Know?" and before "Contribute to this page" and then also in the "All topics" menu -- it is in the "Popular" section at the top. 

On Prime Video

This has been expanded to all our supported streaming providers so it is in the pop-up "(i)" menu to the right of the year of each title.  For example:

User Polls (I have seen this on other people)

Ah, but this person is not the direct subject of any of these polls so this was confusing; if a name actually appears as an option in a poll, the widget is still present.  For example, see https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0428065/ 

Hope this helps.

@Col_Needham​ 

And if a name is linked in the introduction of a poll, the poll should also appear on the name page. This appears to be happening correctly.

There is a small issue with the poll widget that I tried to report in the feedback form during testing: No thumbnail image shows up when the poll is based on an image list.

Example: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm6854116/

@Peter_pbn​ Thanks -- that's a good one.  We will make sure the team sees it (and sorry it got lost on the original feedback form). 

@Col_Needham​ 

Having Prime Video information on each title is not comparable to having a list of titles that are available. I'm reporting the absence of this widget from the old layout:

(Side note: amazing that you've already forgotten that Related News was on the right column of the old layout. Hence my missing it initially in the new layout.)

Edited to add: It might be nice to see a Watch Options link in the upper part of the Name Page (over the Add to List button, as it is on Title pages) with the Prime Video list as the pop-up. 

Great catch, bderoes! I tended not to think of that feature since I'm often looking at the name pages about people who aren't credited in a movie or show that is available to watch for free (or so) on Amazon's streaming service with a Prime subscription.

@bderoes​ Thanks for the extra explanation ...

Having Prime Video information on each title is not comparable to having a list of titles that are available.

I understand the difference now and will amend my post above, sorry; it turns out this was a deliberate removal partly due to only one provider being supported, and therefore the resulting lack of clarity and accuracy on full availability.  This better belongs as an additional filter option with support for all of the providers we cover though (as on the iOS app) vs. a separate widget.  We will take this suggestion back to the team. 

It might be nice to see a Watch Options link in the upper part of the Name Page (over the Add to List button, as it is on Title pages) with the Prime Video list as the pop-up.

Thanks. In the meantime you can filter by availability (still only for Prime Video) and title type via any of the views which place you on /name/filmosearch (such as "by Rating"). For example, https://www.imdb.com/filmosearch/?explore=title_type&role=nm0428065&ref_=filmo_ref_typ&sort=user_rating,desc&mode=detail&page=1&title_type=movie&watch_option=has_video_amazon_instant_video 

(Side note: amazing that you've already forgotten that Related News was on the right column of the old layout. Hence my missing it initially in the new layout.)

Ah sorry, I consider the page as having a main section and a right- hand side vs. a left and a right :-) Anyway, glad you found it, regardless of the terminology. 

@xianjiro​ 

If you go through the gallery, the person in question does appear at #104 of 132.

https://www.imdb.com/gallery/rg1269013248/mediaviewer/rm2788575488/